On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 09:39:50PM -0400, Vivien Didelot wrote: > Guenter, > > On Jun 2, 2015, at 2:50 AM, Guenter Roeck li...@roeck-us.net wrote: > > On 06/01/2015 06:27 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote: > >> + /* Bringing an interface up adds it to the VLAN 0. Ignore this. */ > >> + if (!vid) > >> + return 0; > >> + > > > > Me puzzled ;-). I brought this and the fid question up before. > > No idea if my e-mail got lost or what happened. > > > > Can you explain why we don't need a configuration for vlan 0 ? > > Sorry for late reply. Initially, when issuing "ip link set up dev swp0", > ndo_vlan_rx_add_vid was called to add the interface in the VLAN 0. > Loading the 802.1q module has the same effect.
I think this may be on purpose; it is telling the switch to accept packets with vid==0 (and untagged packets). > 2 things happen here: > > * this is inconsistent with the "bridge vlan" output which doesn't seem to > know about a VID 0; > * VID 0 seems special for this switch: if an ingressing frame has VID 0, the > tagged port will override the VID bits with the port default VID at > egress. > As far as I can see, the switch treats packets with vid==0 and untaged packets as unknown if VLAN support is enabled. Anyway, sounds odd. Sure this isn't a configuration problem somethere ? Thanks, Guenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
