From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Apr 17 00:17:38 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 0C60F16A4CE; Sat, 17 Apr 2004 00:17:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net (rwcrmhc12.comcast.net [216.148.227.85])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id E1A7443D48; Sat, 17 Apr 2004 00:17:37 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from julian@elischer.org)
Received: from interjet.elischer.org ([24.7.73.28])
          by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with ESMTP
          id <200404170717270140018b6qe>; Sat, 17 Apr 2004 07:17:37 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1])
	by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id AAA71792;
	Sat, 17 Apr 2004 00:17:27 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 00:17:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20040417055549.GB81778@ip.net.ua>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0404170013340.66312-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: RFC: ported NetBSD if_bridge
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 07:17:38 -0000



On Sat, 17 Apr 2004, 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'd guess that missing features in netgraph would be
the utility and the fact that NGM_BRIDGE_SET_TABLE_ENTRY
hasn't been implemented. I don't know which of about 50 definitions of
"Spanning tree support" this code implements so that may also be a new 
feature..

Of course it can't do some of the things that ng_bridge can do either..
(such as bridging over  VPN)

> 

> Cheers,
> -- 
> Ruslan Ermilov
> ru@FreeBSD.org
> FreeBSD committer
>