https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=270559
--- Comment #8 from Philip Paeps <phi...@freebsd.org> --- Our if_bridge(4) really only implements the learning and forwarding parts of the original 802.1D standard. It's really only aware of VLANs because if_vlan(4) puts the relevant tags in the mbuf. It does not try to be a complete implementation of 802.1Q-2014 (which incorporates bridging, VLANs and some other stuff). The comment introducing the VLANTAGOF(_m) macro is a little confusing if this patch is applied as-is. I'm also not convinced that this change is correct. VLAN 0 is not a valid VID but it's perfectly possible for a dot1q tag with VID=0 to appear on the wire: it indicates untagged traffic with a PCP or the DEI bit set. I wonder if we should use 0xFFF rather than 0 as the magic number for untagged frames. 0xFFF is reserved in 802.1Q-2014 for implementation use. Did either of you test what happens if a packet with a dot1q header that only contains a PCP and not a VID gets forwarded? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
