Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I think there is one more case that matters, which is briding
from a device with VLAN stripping for a VLAN not configured
locally. The tag will be stripped and will be lost for forwarded
packets.
I think we should drop such p
Ben Greear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bridging eth0 to eth1 should not pay attention to VLAN tags
> at all (if the pkt comes in on VLAN 7, it should go out on VLAN 7),
> in my opinion. If the NIC is stripping the VLAN header, then this
> cannot work unless something re-builds the VLAN header.
Krzysztof Halasa wrote:
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I think there is one more case that matters, which is briding
from a device with VLAN stripping for a VLAN not configured
locally. The tag will be stripped and will be lost for forwarded
packets.
I think we should drop such p
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think there is one more case that matters, which is briding
> from a device with VLAN stripping for a VLAN not configured
> locally. The tag will be stripped and will be lost for forwarded
> packets.
I think we should drop such packets on RX. Anyway
From: Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2007 01:21:09 +0100
> David Miller wrote:
> > From: Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 19:00:19 +0100
> >
> >> This looks like a rather expensive operation for the unlikely case
> >> that packets will be recei
David Miller wrote:
From: Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 19:00:19 +0100
This looks like a rather expensive operation for the unlikely case
that packets will be received by a packet socket. IMO it should only
be reconstructed if actually needed, by af_packet itself.
From: Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 19:00:19 +0100
> This looks like a rather expensive operation for the unlikely case
> that packets will be received by a packet socket. IMO it should only
> be reconstructed if actually needed, by af_packet itself.
Completely agreed
Dave Johnson wrote:
+/* VLAN rx hw acceleration helper. This acts like netif_{rx,receive_skb}(). */
+static inline int __vlan_hwaccel_rx(struct sk_buff *skb,
+ struct vlan_group *grp,
+ unsigned short vlan_tag, int polling)
+{
.
Some MACs are configured to remove VLAN tags on RX packets even if
the kernel isn't setup to use VLANs.
On these drivers it is bad to simply pass the packets with the VLAN
tag removed to the network stack. This gives the network stack the
impression these packets arrived from the network without
