Garrett D'Amore writes:
> Has any thought been given to the notion of just eliminating the vlan 
> hack altogether?

More than once, sure.

> It seems like there are better ways to express vlans, and the "hack" has 
> always been a bit unsettling to me. Now that we're on a 
> pseudo-major-release boundary (OpenSolaris), couldn't this be a time to 
> break that compatibility?

My understanding is that it's not open season on all possible
incompatibilities, or even those that just please us, but rather only
those few that are strictly necessary to achieve some higher level of
"familiarity" (or perhaps "parity") with Linux.

I don't see how the existence of the VLAN hack is related to Linux in
any substantial way.

I agree with you that it's an ugly thing and certainly does cause
problems, but that's not something I can see solving just because of
the Linux compatibility goal.

More importantly, eliminating the VLAN hack does nothing to solve the
problem I've described, so I've got nothing to gain by it.

(I've heard that Crossbow aims to remove the hack.  I don't know
whether that's the final goal, a strict requirement, or just something
that discussed with the ARC.  In any event, that's not this project.)

> (Actually, although everyone knows about, I'm 
> having trouble locating any documentation that specifically refers to 
> the PPA-based VLAN hack. So maybe its not technically interface breakage 
> anyway.)

I cited it in the previous message -- it's defined in PSARC 2000/147.

-- 
James Carlson, Solaris Networking              <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive        71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to