David Young wrote:
> We should not have Yet Another Tool to configure VLANs and to bridge
> ethernets, but we should use bridge(4) and vlan(4) for that purpose.
> The kernel needs both to give bridge(4) member devices the opportunity
> to use hardware features to optimize the data plane. Similarly,
> vlan(4) needs to let the physical interface assume some of the tagging.
> The idea is to use familiar interfaces to configure bridges and VLANs,
> even on unfamiliar hardware.
I just document myself a bit better on VLAN and bridges.
After re-reading the datasheet, it seems to me that the OS can barely
control address learning of the bridge. It can almost only control the
aging, disable the learning, set hashing function, set MTU,... Same goes
for VLANs. I can't find any reference for 802.1Q conformance in the
datasheet. I'm not even sure the implementation is VLAN hoping safe. The
routing description is pretty basic.