On 25/08/15 16:24, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Tue, 25 Aug 2015 15:50:10 -0700 > Florian Fainelli <f.faine...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> This patch series implements a L2 only interface concept which basically >> denies >> any kind of IP address configuration on these interfaces, but still allows >> them >> to be used as configuration end-points to keep using ethtool and friends. >> >> A cleaner approach might be to finally come up with the concept of net_port >> which a net_device would be a superset of, but this still raises tons of >> questions as to whether we should be modifying userland tools to be able to >> configure/query these interfaces. During all the switch talks/discussions >> last >> year, it seemed to me like th L2-only interface is closest we have to a >> "network port". >> >> Comments, flames, flying tomatoes welcome! >> >> Florian Fainelli (5): >> net: add IFF_L2_ONLY flag >> net: ipv4: Skip in_dev initialization for IFF_L2_ONLY interfaces >> net: ipv6: Skip in6_dev initialization for IFF_L2_ONLY interfaces >> net: dsa: Flag slave network devices with IFF_L2_ONLY >> net: dsa: bcm_sf2: Allow disabling tagging protocol >> >> drivers/net/dsa/bcm_sf2.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- >> include/uapi/linux/if.h | 5 ++++- >> net/dsa/slave.c | 1 + >> net/ipv4/devinet.c | 3 +++ >> net/ipv6/addrconf.c | 4 ++++ >> 5 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> > > Can you bridge these?
You can add such an interface to the bridge, but I am still figuring out how functional such a bridge is, because with my change to bcm_sf2, there is no switch tag inserted, so I cannot differentiate a BPDU from Port 0, 1 etc... probably of limited use. You could still configure VLANs using bridge vlan filtering though, which was the main idea. -- Florian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
