This is probably no news to experienced bridge and VLAN users but I just learned the hard way that Shared VLAN learning(SVL) isn't supported by the linux bridge making it impossible to support configurations described in B.1.3 Basically the bride needs to be made VLAN aware and the VLAN code needs to be adopted to allow this. I figured I should mention it in case it is just an oversight. It does not look like a simple job though. Jocke
Hi Joakim, Look back a month or so in the archives - you'll find an email from me referencing a patch to make the bridge VLAN aware. It's a little old, and needs updating for 2.6 (it was written for 2.4) - but should not be much work to get it done. There is a matching patch for the brctl utility. Simon Joakim Tjernlund wrote:> This is probably no news to experienced bridge and VLAN users but I just learned the > hard way that Shared VLAN learning(SVL) isn't supported > by the linux bridge making it impossible to support configurations described in B.1.3 > Basically the bride needs to be made VLAN aware and the VLAN code needs to be adopted > to allow this. > > I figured I should mention it in case it is just an oversight. It does not look like a simple > job though. > > Jocke > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge mailing list > Bridge at lists.linux-foundation.org > https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge >
Joakim Tjernlund/Transmode wrote on 22/08/2009 17:36:54:> > Simon Barber <simon at superduper.net> wrote on 22/08/2009 16:34:11: > > > > Hi Joakim, > > > > Look back a month or so in the archives - you'll find an email from me > > referencing a patch to make the bridge VLAN aware. It's a little old, > > and needs updating for 2.6 (it was written for 2.4) - but should not be > > much work to get it done. There is a matching patch for the brctl utility. > > > > Simon > > > > Thanks Simon > > Do you mean the "bridge vlan integration" patch? > It is not clear to me if this would support the case > described in B.1.3(802.1Q-2005), does it? > > Seems like there is little interest to post this to 2.6 and > I am not sure how welcome this would be either, perhaps > the bridge maintainer could comment? > > JockeThinking a bit more about this I could envision some changes to the vlan code too. I image one could create one vlan interface which will listen to several VLANs. One VLAN is the primary VLAN and is used in the tx path by default. The bridge would be able to filter on individual VLANs received from such interface and be able to chose outgoing VLAN too. Jocke