On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 09:32:30AM -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > Frederik Deweerdt wrote: > >On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 01:12:06PM +0100, Alex Zeffertt wrote: > >>>>Another possible problem: what if you are trying to encapsulate vlan 7 inside > >>>>of vlan 7. How do you know to double-encapsulate? What if user-space is sending > >>>>a pre-built VLAN frame with a raw socket? I'm not sure there is enough info as to > >>>>the intent to encapsulate or not once the VLAN code receives the packet. > >>> > >>>I see how my proposal was wrong. Let me wild guess again :). I wondered if the following > >>>code could be better. The idea being that the code could determine the need for > >>>encapsulating or not from the interface's nesting level and the actual number of VLAN tags in the packet. > >> > >> > >> > >>I think we've had this conversation before. Search the list archives for "vlan Q in Q" > >Thanks for the pointer. Do you know why your patch didn't get merged into mainline? > > If I remember right, it had the same issues with bridging and raw packets. > > I don't have a lot of time to work on vlan code at the moment, but you all > can work on patches and if we get something that works, I'll review it and > see if netdev will merge it. > > [... tests to do ...] Thanks for your feedback Ben, I'll setup those tests so that we'll be able to spot the potential regressions. Regards, Frederik
