On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 10:12:35AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2021/10/27 17:44, David Gwynne wrote:
> > 
> > > benno@ suggested I look at vether(4) to adapt the text related to
> > > bridge(4) but I'm not sure how to rewrite it properly for veb(4).
> > 
> > i get that, but for a different reason. im too close to veb/vport, so i
> > think it's all very obvious.
> > 
> > maybe we could split the first paragraph into separate ones for veb
> > and vport, and flesh them out a bit. what is it about vport that
> > needs to be said?
> 
> I'm not so close to veb/vport (and haven't run into a situation to use
> it yet, though maybe I'll give it a try converting an etherip/ipsec
> bridge that I have). I think it's pretty obvious too, though I think
> people aren't grasping what "the network stack can be connected" means,
> would the diff below help? it feels a bit more like spelling things out
> than is usual for a manual page but maybe that's needed here.
> 
> for ifconfig I would be in favour of _not_ listing all the possible
> cloneable interface types that can be used with create, it's just another
> thing to get out of sync - maybe just a few of the common ones and tell
> the reader about ifconfig -C at that point.. "ifconfig create" barely
> seems necessary except possibly for tun/tap - for most interface types
> you are going to run another ifconfig command (like "ifconfig veb0 add
> em0") which creates the interface automatically anyway.
> 

hi.

i agree with staurt about "create": this list was once short and made
sense. now it just keeps going out of date, without providing any help
to the reader. i don;t want to stack diff on diff, but maybe once the
veb stuff is sorted i will zap the create list.

that strategy does rely on individual driver docs saying upfront that
they can be created though, even if using create is not common. i wonder if
ifconfig already knows what it can create, and could maybe be more
helpful if "create" without an ifname gave a hint.

anyway, to that end i'm ok with solene's diff.

i'm also ok with your diff, with one tweak:

> Index: veb.4
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/share/man/man4/veb.4,v
> retrieving revision 1.2
> diff -u -p -r1.2 veb.4
> --- veb.4     23 Feb 2021 11:43:41 -0000      1.2
> +++ veb.4     27 Oct 2021 09:03:49 -0000
> @@ -28,20 +28,30 @@ The
>  .Nm veb
>  pseudo-device supports the creation of a single layer 2 Ethernet
>  network between multiple ports.
> -Ethernet interfaces are added to the bridge to be used as ports.
> +Ethernet interfaces are added to the
>  .Nm veb
> -takes over the operation of the interfaces that are added as ports
> -and uses them independently of the host network stack.
> -The network stack can be connected to the Ethernet network managed
> -by
> +bridge to be used as ports.
> +Unlike
> +.Xr bridge 4 ,
>  .Nm veb
> -by creating a
> +takes over the operation of the interfaces that are added as ports.
> +They are then independent of the host network stack; the individual

i think a colon would work better than a semi-colon here, since i think
the info after it is essentially an explainer of what independent means.

jmc

> +Ethernet ports no longer function as independent layer 3 devices
> +and cannot be configured with
> +.Xr inet 4
> +or
> +.Xr inet6 4
> +addresses themselves.
> +.Pp
> +The Ethernet network managed by
> +.Nm veb
> +can be connected to the network stack as a whole by creating a
>  .Nm vport
>  interface and attaching it as a port to the bridge.
>  From the perspective of the host network stack, a
>  .Nm vport
>  interface acts as a normal interface connected to an Ethernet
> -network.
> +network and can be configured with addresses.
>  .Pp
>  .Nm veb
>  is a learning bridge that maintains a table of Ethernet addresses
> 

Reply via email to