From: Ido Schimmel
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 08:54:33 +0200
> Hi Dave,
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 01:58:39PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> I'm waiting for this discussion to be fully resolved before applying this
>> patch. Just FYI...
>
> I have a fix for the issue David reported, but it is not
On 2/20/18 12:45 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> From: Ido Schimmel
>
> Up until now we only allowed VLAN devices to be put in a VLAN-unaware
> bridge, but some users need the ability to enslave physical ports as
> well.
>
> This is achieved by mapping the port and VID 1 to the bridge's vFID,
> instead
Hi Dave,
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 01:58:39PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> I'm waiting for this discussion to be fully resolved before applying this
> patch. Just FYI...
I have a fix for the issue David reported, but it is not related to this
patch (problem manifests itself with VLAN-aware bridges
On 2/22/18 1:55 PM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 12:27:35PM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
>> Ido:
>>
>> IPv4 works at boot; IPv6 requires the mcast snooping disable. For this
>> vlan-unaware bridges can that be set automatically?
>
> Can you please try the following patch?
>
...
>
>
On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 12:27:35PM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> Ido:
>
> IPv4 works at boot; IPv6 requires the mcast snooping disable. For this
> vlan-unaware bridges can that be set automatically?
Can you please try the following patch?
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlxsw/spectrum_f
On 2/22/18 11:58 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: David Ahern
> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 11:16:35 -0700
>
>> On 2/20/18 12:45 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>> From: Ido Schimmel
>>>
>>> Up until now we only allowed VLAN devices to be put in a VLAN-unaware
>>> bridge, but some users need the ability to ens
From: David Ahern
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 11:16:35 -0700
> On 2/20/18 12:45 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> From: Ido Schimmel
>>
>> Up until now we only allowed VLAN devices to be put in a VLAN-unaware
>> bridge, but some users need the ability to enslave physical ports as
>> well.
>>
>> This is achi
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 12:41:39PM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 2/21/18 12:25 PM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> >>
> >> and can talk to the hosts:
> >> # ping6 ff02::2%br0
> >
> > Can you try ff02::1 ?
>
> same result.
>
> >
> >> PING ff02::2%br0(ff02::2) 56 data bytes
> >> 64 bytes from fe80::7efe:9
On 2/21/18 1:24 PM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
>>> Does it matter if you try IPv4 ping or if vlan_filtering is set 1?
>>> Unfortunately, I can't reproduce on my switch.
>>
>> Bring up the hosts and then reboot the switch. At that point I get no
>> host to host communication. As soon as I flap the port on
On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 11:16:35AM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 2/20/18 12:45 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > From: Ido Schimmel
> >
> > Up until now we only allowed VLAN devices to be put in a VLAN-unaware
> > bridge, but some users need the ability to enslave physical ports as
> > well.
> >
> > Th
On 2/21/18 12:25 PM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
>>
>> and can talk to the hosts:
>> # ping6 ff02::2%br0
>
> Can you try ff02::1 ?
same result.
>
>> PING ff02::2%br0(ff02::2) 56 data bytes
>> 64 bytes from fe80::7efe:90ff:fee8:3a79: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.073 ms
>> 64 bytes from fe80::202:ff:fe00:2:
On 2/20/18 12:45 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> From: Ido Schimmel
>
> Up until now we only allowed VLAN devices to be put in a VLAN-unaware
> bridge, but some users need the ability to enslave physical ports as
> well.
>
> This is achieved by mapping the port and VID 1 to the bridge's vFID,
> instead
From: Ido Schimmel
Up until now we only allowed VLAN devices to be put in a VLAN-unaware
bridge, but some users need the ability to enslave physical ports as
well.
This is achieved by mapping the port and VID 1 to the bridge's vFID,
instead of the port and the VID used by the VLAN device.
The a
13 matches
Mail list logo