Hello Felix,
Thank you for your comments.
On 11/02/17 21:49, Felix Fietkau wrote:
Hey Mauro,
please don't take Mathias' feedback as hostile, it really isn't. His
Please see the threads on FS#390 and FS#321 there is a pattern.
patch seems to take the same basic approach as yours, so I would
consider his request for testing his staging tree reasonable.
I am sure that technically Mathias' patch will work. The problem is not
technical, but rather in the prioritization of the Red Ethernet Use
Cases that I documented in my previous post.
While you can treat the extra port in your configuration as a 'dmz'
interface, I don't think it is reasonable for the default config.
You should be able to make your configuration work even with his changes.
Could you please run the test even if you still like your change better?
I understand the logic to name the Red Ethernet as "wan". This would be
aligned to the majority of routers that do not have an xDSL port.
However, since I want to have full control from the wire entering my
premises, I always prefer a router with an actual xDSL WAN port. In my
area the upgrade from xDSL is an actual Ethernet IP/IP Subnet (no pppoe
necessary).
Therefore I never had any use for routers with a WAN Ethernet as WAN. I
just use the WAN Interface with a static IP on the DMZ.
On xDSL routers the DSL port has always been the WAN interface.
The Red Ethernet on BT Home Hub 5 xDSL router is an extra bonus.
I believe that renaming the current "wan" to "xwan" on xDSL routers
would be a mistake because it is not backward compatible.
An impact scenario for an "end user" is: I have routers in unmanaged
remote locations, if I upgrade my routers to a firmware that renames the
WAN interface, they will fail to reconnect the WAN on reboot. I could
prepare the new configuration in /etc/config/network before flashing the
new firmware, but without testing it would be a risk that might cost me
a 3000Km round trip.
If you want to configure the Red Ethernet as a WAN, please name it
something which isn't WAN. It would be ok for my use cases, because I
can always turn it into an interface with a static IP.
Best regards,
Mauro
_______________________________________________
Lede-dev mailing list
Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
