[rbridge] Configuration of VLANs vs selfconfiguration
gibanez at it.uc3m.es
Fri Sep 23 01:33:27 PDT 2005
Guillermo Ibáñez wrote :
Your proposal is fine, but I think it only covers configuring per-MAC
belonging to a VLAN, not per-port, and per-port is the criteria to
belong to VLAN most related with the bridges, where the real splitting
of the physical network into separate virtual networks is done. Per MAC
belonging to VLAN can be considered "external" to the bridge, as your
Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
>--On fredag, september 23, 2005 09:38:53 +0200 Guillermo Ibáñez
><gibanez at it.uc3m.es> wrote:
>> IMHO, with this restrictive interpretation of zero configuration we
>>solve only half of the configuration problem.
>> Anyway, if this is the prevalent opinion, I suggest to add this
>>clarification to the draft (zero configuration for single LAN, equal
>>configuration for VLANs as standard bridges).
>I think you could in theory get close to zeroconf for VLAN membership.
>It would go something like:
>- Device attaches
>- Bridge broadcasts "who knows this guy" on a reserved "management" VLAN
>- Some management function replies "I do - he's in vlan G"
>- Bridge configures the port to that VLAN
> (or if no reply - to a "default" VLAN)
>(For extra credits, work in where to add 802.1x authentication)
>The only config on the bridge would be what answers to believe (security
>makes complete zeroconf impossible, but we all know that by now....)
>But this mechanism would be completely orthogonal to what TRILL is about,
>of course. So this is not the right list to discuss it.
>rbridge mailing list
>rbridge at postel.org
More information about the rbridge