Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:28:35 +0000 (GMT) From: Mike Wolman <mike@nux.co.uk> To: Charlie Schluting <charlie@schluting.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vlans changed? Message-ID: <20050119212500.Y91508@black.eros.office> In-Reply-To: <41EECAC0.3000801@schluting.com> References: <41EECAC0.3000801@schluting.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I had major grief with the em driver and vlans, i have found by tcpdumping on the em0 interface actually causes more problems. there are some more posts about this a couple of months ago, my resolution was to swap the em card for an fxp instead as the box was in production and i didnt have other options. Mike. On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Charlie Schluting wrote: > Did something change from 5.2.1 to 5.3? > > In 5.2.1 I used to have a config where the parent device, em(4), didn't have > an IP, and the vlan dev had the IP address. (yes, the parent device was "UP") > I then configured the trunk (on the switch) to have a native vlan of > something other than the vlan interface's vlan. > > This worked. > > Now, in 5.3, the only thing I can get working is to configure the em0 int > with the IP, and set the trunk to have the native vlan corresponding to that > IP. Weird. > > Also, is there a way to stop em(4) from stripping dot1q tags in hardware? I'd > like to see them with tcpdump. What kind of a performance hit does this > involve? > > Thanks :) > > -Charlie > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050119212500.Y91508>