Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 16:24:16 +0200 From: Christian Brueffer <brueffer@FreeBSD.org> To: Andrew Thompson <thompsa@freebsd.org>, Ian FREISLICH <ianf@clue.co.za>, Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, brooks@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CFT: new trunk(4) Message-ID: <20070413142416.GB4558@haakonia.hitnet.RWTH-Aachen.DE> In-Reply-To: <20070412210957.GA31864@heff.fud.org.nz> References: <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> <20070411191450.GE815@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <E1Hbs1M-000FWA-7Z@clue.co.za> <20070412210957.GA31864@heff.fud.org.nz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 09:09:58AM +1200, Andrew Thompson wrote: > On Thu, Apr 12, 2007 at 07:39:00AM +0200, Ian FREISLICH wrote: > > Peter Jeremy wrote: > > > On 2007-Apr-11 15:43:04 +0200, Ian FREISLICH <ianf@clue.co.za> wrote: > > > >Andrew Thompson wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 11:17:29AM +0200, Ian FREISLICH wrote: > > > >> > We're making extensive use of vlans to increase the number of > > > >> > interfaces availabble to us using switches to break out gigE into > > > >> > 100M interfaces. The bandwidth problem we're having is to our > > > >> > provider, a 100M connection, and we're looking at doing exactly > > > >> > this. However, it appears that this interface can't trunk vlan > > > >> > interfaces. > > > =3D2E.. > > > >No, I'm sure I want it the way I said. I know it sounds wrong, but > > > >I just don't have enough PCI-X slots to waste 2 on physical 100M > > > >NICs for the uplink from the routers. > > >=20 > > > Trunking is a way of combining multiple physical interfaces to increa= se > > > the bandwidth. Trunking multiple VLANs on a single interface doesn't > > > make sense to me. > >=20 > > 802.1q is VLAN tagging and trunking. This interface is LACP - link > > aggregation. I really think that it makes no sense to be able to > > aggregate some ethernet interfaces and not others. I suppose some > > pedant will tell me vlan interfaces are not ethernet. >=20 > I think the unfortunate name of trunk(4) that we inherited from OpenBSD > is causing quite some confusion. trunk(4) actually has nothing to do > with vlan trunking which I think you are after. >=20 > I can see this topic coming up again so it could save some time to > rename the driver now. It would mean that we lose the naming link to the > same driver in OpenBSD but you cant win em all. >=20 > Some names that have been suggested are: >=20 > linkag(4) > agr(4) > bond(4) <- same as linux >=20 agr(4) as I understand it sounds very restrictive to me considering the different modes trunk(4) supports. I'd prefer bond(4) (also a great opportunaty to add some 007 jokes to the manpage :-P). - Christian --=20 Christian Brueffer chris@unixpages.org brueffer@FreeBSD.org GPG Key: http://people.freebsd.org/~brueffer/brueffer.key.asc GPG Fingerprint: A5C8 2099 19FF AACA F41B B29B 6C76 178C A0ED 982D --IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFGH5KQbHYXjKDtmC0RAg+QAJ9HEE+MCubXSU4mq+7JEeJh8KB8xACg8ehz Dxn/qCFBuA2kxYQPoM23ATY= =dAs7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070413142416.GB4558>