On 08/06/16(Wed) 21:18, Vincent Gross wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jun 2016 15:12:23 +0200 > Martin Pieuchot <m...@openbsd.org> wrote: > > > On 07/06/16(Tue) 22:02, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > On 2016/06/07 21:49, Vincent Gross wrote: > > > > > > > > It's how henning@ set things up when integrating the new queuing > > > > mechanism. > > > > http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sys/kern/uipc_mbuf.c#rev1.160 > > > > > > > > > Is there any use for this apart for vlan(4) interfaces? > > > > > > > > AFAICT, no. > > > > In this case I'd suggest to make this a vlan(4) specific > > configuration, is there a problem with that? > > Actually, there is. Consider this setup: > > # ifconfig vlan4 vlan 4 vlandev em0 up > # ifconfig vlan5 vlan 4 vlandev em1 up > # ifconfig trunk0 trunkproto failover trunkport vlan4 trunport vlan5 up > # ifconfig trunk0 10.10.10.50/24 > > llprio in vlan4 or vlan5 is useless because they are not initiating > ARP requests, and adding lookups in trunk would be the Wrong Way.
Ok I think I got it with your example. I was thinking of overwriting the default priority in vlan_start() but as you said in your case since vlan(4) are not initiating the ARP requests this would penalize all the traffic. I'm ok with your diff
