Julian Elischer wrote: > > On Sat, 17 Apr 2004, Andrew Thompson wrote: >>Hi, >>I have ported over the bridging code from NetBSD and am looking for feedback. >>My main question is, 'do people want this in the tree?' >> >>The benefits over the current bridge are: >> * ability to manage the bridge table >> * spanning tree support >> * the snazzy brconfig utility >> * clonable pseudo-interface (is that a benefit?) > > Do we need THREE bridging systems? > If you need features you culd probably add them pretty easily to one or > the other of the existing bridging modules.. This if_bridge would replace the current bridge(4) code. It doesn't make sense to replicate that. However to keep ipfw working for bridging it needs to be converted to use the standard pfil hooks. ng_bridge is something else with a different scope of application like bridging over UDP etc. This if_bridge code supports IEEE802 spanning-tree which is spoken by all Ethernet switches. If you have larger networks it is very important to have layer 2 loop avoidance. I'm all for adapting this bridge code to FreeBSD provided that ipfw keeps working for bridging. -- AndreReceived on Sat Apr 17 2004 - 02:05:42 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:37:51 UTC