Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list netdev); Thu, 31 Mar 2005 21:03:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from netcore.fi (netcore.fi [193.94.160.1]) by oss.sgi.com (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id j3153p36004195 for ; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 21:03:52 -0800 Received: from localhost (pekkas@localhost) by netcore.fi (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j3153dA06779; Fri, 1 Apr 2005 08:03:39 +0300 Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 08:03:39 +0300 (EEST) From: Pekka Savola To: Ben Greear cc: "'netdev@oss.sgi.com'" Subject: Re: RFC: Redirect-Device In-Reply-To: <424C6089.1080507@candelatech.com> Message-ID: References: <424C6089.1080507@candelatech.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.83/798/Thu Mar 31 01:54:41 2005 on oss.sgi.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-archive-position: 1176 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: pekkas@netcore.fi Precedence: bulk X-list: netdev Content-Length: 867 Lines: 22 On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Ben Greear wrote: > I created a new virtual ethernet device that solves a problem > I faced. I thought I'd see if anyone else sees a use for this, > and if so, I'll work to polish the patch so that it can be > accepted into the kernel. Unless I'm misunderstanding.. You seem to have pretty much duplicated the work by Lennert (see thread "[PATCH][RFC] etherip: Ethernet-in-IPv4 tunneling" from January). That particular thread seemed to conclude that instead of creating something new, you can just use GRE tunneling to bridge Ethernet, and it works in a multi-vendor environment as well. Is there something in your problem statement I'm missing? -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings