Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 25 Apr 2002 00:23:06 +0200 | From | jd@epcnet ... | Subject | AW: Re: AW: Re: AW: Re: VLAN and Network Drivers 2.4.x |
| |
> Von: <greearb@candelatech.com> > Gesendet: 24.04.2002 20:00 > > > This creates a support issue. It's almost impossible to field > > bug reports effectively once you start letting users do stuff > > like this. > We let users do much worse: rm -fr / > won't even warn you.
But it would do, what we expect. VLAN on a e.g. unpatched tulip driver is somewhat unpredictable. You can hope any application is using small packets, but if not things get worse.
> I'm all for warning the user, but since the > MTU issue can be worked around by setting the VLAN MTU to 1496, > and sometimes setting the eth0 MTU to 1504, then putting hard > restrictions in the kernel sounds like a really bad idea.
This sounds very "experimental". What about the non-VLAN packets on eth0, when you set the MTU 1504?
I like the NETIF_F_VLAN_CHALLENGED capability in the driver itself, which is then tested by the net subsystem on creation of a VLAN. No more tweaks and fiddling around with MTU and framesizes.
Greetings
Jochen Dolze
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |