Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 18:45:42 +0200 From: Arne Schwabe <schwabe@uni-paderborn.de> To: "Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Andrew Thompson <thompsa@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/net if_bridge.c if_bridgevar.h src/sbin/ifconfig ifbridge.c Message-ID: <4687DA36.1010604@uni-paderborn.de> In-Reply-To: <468772E0.5080406@FreeBSD.org> References: <200706131858.l5DIw4Yr009448@repoman.freebsd.org> <20070701081714.GA44671%slw@zxy.spb.ru> <468772E0.5080406@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bruce M. Simpson schrieb: > Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 06:58:04PM +0000, Andrew Thompson wrote: >> >>> >>> All non-tagged traffic is treated as vlan1 as per IEEE 802.1Q-2003 >>> >> >> Common practice: non-tagged traffic is treated as "native vlan". >> > I'm confused now. Is this practice different from what the 802.1Q > standard says? > You can have a tagged Vlan 1 and an untaged (native in cisco speech) on dot1q port (trunk in cisco speech). Some standard even uses vlan 0. Iirc some Qos stuff. A real world example: interface GigabitEthernet0/21 description uplink cat6509-e switchport trunk native vlan 506 switchport trunk allowed vlan 1,323,506 Has a tagged vlan with ID 1 and an untagged vlan with corrosponds to vlan 506. I have not looked at diff but if the native vlan or untagged ethernet frames are treated as vlan 1 this example vlan 1 and vlan 506 would be mixed. Arne
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4687DA36.1010604>