Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 18:03:07 +1200 From: Andrew Thompson <andy@fud.org.nz> To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: ported NetBSD if_bridge Message-ID: <20040417060307.GC67219@kate.fud.org.nz> In-Reply-To: <20040417055549.GB81778@ip.net.ua> References: <20040417035758.GA66806@kate.fud.org.nz> <20040417055549.GB81778@ip.net.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 08:55:49AM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 03:57:58PM +1200, Andrew Thompson wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > I have ported over the bridging code from NetBSD and am looking for feedback. > > My main question is, 'do people want this in the tree?' > > > > > > The benefits over the current bridge are: > > * ability to manage the bridge table > > * spanning tree support > > * the snazzy brconfig utility > > * clonable pseudo-interface (is that a benefit?) > > > What advantages does it offer compared to the ng_bridge(4) functionality? > I didnt know about that one, I guess the main advantage is that all three *BSDs would have the same code and interface. While I imported it from NetBSD, it originated in OpenBSD. Thats assuming anyone cares about that sort of thing. Andrew
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040417060307.GC67219>