[rbridge] Configuration of VLANs vs selfconfiguration

[Gray, Eric]

Also, consider any device that participates in an arbitrary number
of VLANs using a single Ethernet PHY.  It should not - for example
- have 4096 MAC addresses.

--
Eric

--> -----Original Message-----
--> From: rbridge-bounces at postel.org 
--> [mailto:rbridge-bounces at postel.org]On
--> Behalf Of Holland, David (David)
--> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 11:38 AM
--> To: Developing a hybrid router/bridge.
--> Subject: Re: [rbridge] Configuration of VLANs vs selfconfiguration
--> 
--> 
--> Joe,
--> 
--> A MAC may certainly be on more than one VLAN. Consider a 
--> BSD or Linux implementation with a virtual interface 
--> configured, and imagine an applications like telephony 
--> using the virtual interface with tagging (for priority) and 
--> other applications using the standard interface. Both flows 
--> will have the same MAC, but (potentially) belong to different VLANS.
--> 
--> David
--> 
--> -----Original Message-----
--> From: rbridge-bounces at postel.org 
--> [mailto:rbridge-bounces at postel.org]On
--> Behalf Of Joe Touch
--> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 11:09 AM
--> To: Developing a hybrid router/bridge.
--> Subject: Re: [rbridge] Configuration of VLANs vs selfconfiguration
--> 
--> 
--> I'm not sure whether being in more than one VLAN breaks this or is
--> permitted (it seems like it wouldn't be, but I'm not sure).
--> 
--> However, the step below assumes a preconfigured management function:
--> >>- Some management function replies "I do - he's in vlan G"
--> 
--> That's not zero-config to me; it, like DHCP, just moves the
--> configuration to a central location.
--> 
--> Joe
--> 
--> 
--> Gray, Eric wrote:
--> > Joe,
--> > 
--> > 	Last I heard, there was nothing preventing the same MAC 
--> > address living in more than one VLAN.  In fact, for routers and
--> > VLAN bridges, wouldn't this be the dominant case?
--> > 
--> > 	If that has not changed, then the suggested approach will
--> > not even work - independent of whether or not its in scope for
--> > what we're trying to do.
--> > 
--> > --
--> > Eric
--> > 
--> > 
--> ====================================================================
--> > While Harald's suggestion is interesting, IMO it would be 
--> part of an
--> > rbridge only after it has been developed for bridges first.
--> > 
--> > This is not an rbridge issue.
--> > 
--> > Joe
--> > 
--> > 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).
--> >>>Guillermo
--> >>
--> >>
--> >>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.
--> >>
--> >>                       Harald
--> >>
--> >>_______________________________________________
--> >>rbridge mailing list
--> >>rbridge at postel.org
--> >>http://www.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
--> > 
--> > 
--> > --> -----Original Message-----
--> > --> From: rbridge-bounces at postel.org 
--> > --> [mailto:rbridge-bounces at postel.org]On
--> > --> Behalf Of Joe Touch
--> > --> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 10:21 AM
--> > --> To: Developing a hybrid router/bridge.
--> > --> Subject: Re: [rbridge] Configuration of VLANs vs 
--> selfconfiguration
--> > --> 
--> > --> 
--> > --> _______________________________________________
--> > --> rbridge mailing list
--> > --> rbridge at postel.org
--> > --> http://www.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
--> > --> 
--> > _______________________________________________
--> > rbridge mailing list
--> > rbridge at postel.org
--> > http://www.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
--> 
--> _______________________________________________
--> rbridge mailing list
--> rbridge at postel.org
--> http://www.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
-->