On 15.05.2021 11:09, Paul Oranje wrote:
Op 14 mei 2021, om 15:27 heeft Rafał Miłecki <zaj...@gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:From: Rafał Miłecki <ra...@milecki.pl> Bridge aggregates multiple ports so use a more accurate name ("ports").Confusing that a logical network "interface" references something physical like a "port". One would expect that at least a level is modelled in between and that a bridge in a "interface" config section can bridge several devices (like plain devices/L2 bridges/VLANs/tunnel devices/...). Assuming I fail to understand the model, what am I missing ?For backward compatibility add a temporary config translation. Config example: config interface 'lan' option type 'bridge' list ports 'lan1' list ports 'lan2'
You're most likely confused by the old way of defining bridges that OpenWrt happens to use by default. It's the UCI "interface" section type that defines L2 and L3 at the same time. That said it's not something this patch is trying to address. What gets you confused I'm planning to rework during next days. The first step was: [PATCH] base-files: use "ports" array in board.json network for bridges https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openwrt/patch/20210514092147.30666-1-zaj...@gmail.com/ The new way of defining L2 in L3 /etc/config/netowrk uses "device" and "interface" sections. So that would be actually something like: config device option name 'lan' option type 'bridge' list ports 'lan1' list ports 'lan2' On top of that you could then have L3 specified, e.g.: config interface 'home' option ifname 'lan' option proto 'static' option ipaddr '192.168.1.1' option netmask '255.255.255.0' ("home" being logical name) _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
