Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 17:41:06 -0700 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> To: "Adam C. Migus" <adam@migus.org> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: VLAN support in rcNG [PATCH] Message-ID: <20040418004101.GB14645@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> In-Reply-To: <1082246458.4081c53aa98c4@webservices.migus.org> References: <1082233506.408192a2c476a@webservices.migus.org> <20040417235302.GC3534@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> <1082246458.4081c53aa98c4@webservices.migus.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--E39vaYmALEf/7YXx Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 08:00:58PM -0400, Adam C. Migus wrote: > Quoting Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>: >=20 > > On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 04:25:06PM -0400, Adam C. Migus wrote: > > > The following is a patch that adds support for vlan creation and > > > destruction within rcNG. Using the patch it's possible, for > > example, > > > to create a vlan, `vlan0' with the following directives in > > rc.conf: > > >=20 > > > vlan_interfaces=3D"vlan0" > > > ifconfig_vlan0=3D"DHCP" > > > ifconfig_vlan0_vlan_dev=3D"xl0" > > > ifconfig_vlan0_vlan_tag=3D"2" > > >=20 > > > Is this patch of general interest? Should I submit a PR? > >=20 > > If it wasn't for the patch I'm working on, I'd answer yes.=20 > > Howerver, > > I've got a patch that I need to submit for review and then commit > > that > > will let you do this is a one shot with the clone code. It works by > > doing a major overhaul of the device cloning support so you can > > create > > interfaces of the form <etherif>.<vlantag> and get an vlan interface > > with the appropriate parent and tag. Using your example that would > > mean > > you the follwing in your /etc/rc.conf: > >=20 > > cloned_interfaces=3D"xl0.2" >=20 > Brooks, > Sounds great but when's it going to appear? Is it soon enough to negate > the worth of this as an interim solution? Almostly certaintly. It's done, it works. I just need to deal with one minor cleanup patch and post it to -net for review. It would be commited within three weeks. > Also, while on this topic I have a nit-pick. This convention, > "<interface>.<tag>" is pervasive but despite that, there's a lot of > software that chokes on it. I've seen some shell-based firewall > builders for example that don't like it. >=20 > Does your overhaul patch support naming vlan interfaces "vlan<tag>" if > the user desires it? If not would it be hard to do? I've patched my > RH Linux based machines locally to do "vlan<tag>" for the > aforementioned reason. You can name any interface anything you want today subject to these rules: - No other interface has the name. - The lenght of the name (minus the NUL terminator) is between 1 and 15 characters. -- Brooks --=20 Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 --E39vaYmALEf/7YXx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAgc6cXY6L6fI4GtQRAm7aAJoCvoN7gkllikdZUbbEe3i7Ctkv/wCggNht l9IuicZf/AJ6+1/54JchDrA= =4L6s -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --E39vaYmALEf/7YXx--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040418004101.GB14645>