From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Sep  1 07:37:26 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D59F1065670
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu,  1 Sep 2011 07:37:26 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from lists@opsec.eu)
Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40A308FC0A
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu,  1 Sep 2011 07:37:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD))
	(envelope-from <lists@opsec.eu>)
	id 1Qz1pz-000COl-Vp; Thu, 01 Sep 2011 09:37:23 +0200
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2011 09:37:23 +0200
From: Kurt Jaeger <lists@opsec.eu>
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20110901073723.GM28186@home.opsec.eu>
References: <web-9695190@mx16.intranet.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <web-9695190@mx16.intranet.ru>
Cc: Ivan Alexandrovich <ivsan@ngs.ru>
Subject: Re: Subject:   ethernet Q-in-Q ?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2011 07:37:26 -0000

Hi!

> Here's ugly patch against in 8.2-RELEASE (see attachment) that
> makes vlan nesting possible.

> Don't know about possible side effects though.
> I suppose it doesn't play well wth bridges etc.

Is there an PR for that ? Should I create one 8-) ?

Any comments on the side effects from other readers of this list ?
Any chance to get the patch in the standard kernel ?

I'm far from being an expert in those things, so what might be reasons
for not including this patch ?

-- 
pi@opsec.eu            +49 171 3101372                         9 years to go !