| To: | Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ??? |
| From: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 3 Jun 2000 17:43:49 +0200 |
| Cc: | Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rob Walker <rob@xxxxxxxxxxx>, greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.21.0006031531410.24310-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from Lennert Buytenhek on Sat, Jun 03, 2000 at 03:34:27PM +0200 |
| References: | <Pine.OSF.3.96-heb-2.07.1000603124733.9769A-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0006031531410.24310-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Sat, Jun 03, 2000 at 03:34:27PM +0200, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: > > > On Sat, 3 Jun 2000, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > > I think that the perfect solution will be to remove tags from frames > > _only_ if some process actually reads ethernet headers from this vlan > > device. Any ideas how this can be implemented? > > We could detect if there are any packet sockets (something similar to the > fastroute obstacle detection)? Just use dev->hard_header_parse (or a VLAN pseudo device equivalent) to do it on demand. -Andi -- This is like TV. I don't like TV. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, jamal |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, Mitchell Blank Jr |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, Lennert Buytenhek |
| Next by Thread: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, Ben Greear |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |