| To: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ??? |
| From: | Mitchell Blank Jr <mitch@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 7 Jun 2000 05:12:38 -0700 |
| Cc: | Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxx>, Andrey Savochkin <saw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, rob@xxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <20000607010120.A4334@xxxxxxxxxxx>; from ak@xxxxxx on Wed, Jun 07, 2000 at 01:01:20AM +0200 |
| References: | <20000605102627.A8473@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0006062106130.17520-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20000607010120.A4334@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Andi Kleen wrote: > > "All the world is an IP net"? How should I run IPX over my VLANs then? > > Netfilter is not an IP only thing. It is a generic framework for > packet mangling. Although currently only IPv4 > and IPv6 netfilter implementations exist it would be no big problem > to add ``raw ethernet'' netfilter hooks. Netfilter isn't the problem. IPX and Appletalk AARP both assume that each net_device corresponds to one network, and they keep their per-network state there. So if you had, for instance, two different IPX networks on two different VLANs but they were both called eth0, then linux could not support that. The same goes for just about any of the non-IP protocols. -Mitch |
| Previous by Date: | ipchains fw, portforwarding and masquerading, blind-fire.net |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Support for many devices in the kernel (Was 802.1q), Steve Whitehouse |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, jamal |
| Next by Thread: | Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???, Lennert Buytenhek |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |