Re: [Bridge] Bridge sysfs port_no overflow

Yes. I guess the unused field came in handy. Thanks! On Mar 31, 2008, at 5:42 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:11:31 +0200 > Osama Abu Elsorour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> All >> >> We are running a setup with a large number of bridge ports that >> reaches the 900 ports. A

Re: [Bridge] Bridge sysfs port_no overflow

On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:11:31 +0200 Osama Abu Elsorour <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All > > We are running a setup with a large number of bridge ports that > reaches the 900 ports. After switching to recent kernel and brctl- > utils that uses the sysfs interface, we started noticing that the po

[Bridge] Bridge sysfs port_no overflow

All We are running a setup with a large number of bridge ports that reaches the 900 ports. After switching to recent kernel and brctl- utils that uses the sysfs interface, we started noticing that the port numbers are mis-reported when issues the command: brctl showmacs br1 After tracing the

[Bridge] Bridge sysfs port_no overflow

All We are running a setup with a large number of bridge ports that reaches the 900 ports. After switching to recent kernel and brctl- utils that uses the sysfs interface, we started noticing that the port numbers are mis-reported when issues the command: brctl showmacs br1 After tracing the