Hello, On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 02:44:34PM +0200, Lo??c Minier wrote: > On Wed, Feb 15, 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > vlan does not integrate well with bridged interfaces/bridge utils. Problems > > observed: > > 1. br0.100 and br0.200 is not brought up until /etc/networking/*.d/vlan > > script cases are extended > > I'm not sure of what br0.100 is supposed to mean. br0 is not a 100% > compatible ethernet device. (See below.)
There are two kinds of bridges possible. In this case he probably wants a 802.1D (bridge), with 802.1Q on top of it, especially if he wants to do STP. Anyway: as long as STP is not used, there should be no problem with that, except for that I cannot garantuee it will work kernel-wise. It's als possible to do .1Q and then .1D the .1Q ports, as you already pointed out. The STP is much cleaner then, but can only be undestood by very big/expensive irons that do IVL instead of SVL. But my take on this, is that we can go only go sofar as to support the vlan-raw-device in the interfaces file. Anything more than that is too task-specific, and should be done in preup/up/down/postdown lines in the interfaces fil. Regards, Ard -- begin LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.txt.vbs I am a signature virus. Distribute me until the bitter end -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
