Joakim Tjernlund a écrit :
>
> Nicolas de Pesloüan <[email protected]> wrote on 2010/03/26 21:39:33:
>
>> From: Nicolas de Pesloüan <[email protected]>
>> To: Joakim Tjernlund <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Date: 2010/03/26 21:39
>> Subject: Re: [Bridge] IP address on physcial interface instead of bridge
>> interface?
>>
>> Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>>
>>> Figure a small picture will help so here it is:
>>>
>>> Before adding eth0 to br0:
>>> eth0 br0
>>> |
>>> |
>>> HW controller
>>>
>>> after adding eth0 to br0:
>>> eth0
>>> \
>>> \
>>> br0
>>> /
>>> /
>>> HW controller
>> I don't understand your ascii art. What is HW controller ? eth0 is an
>> hardware
>> controller !?
>>
>> Nicolas.
>
> eth0 is the I/F IP stack will see/use. HW controller is the ethernet HW
> controller,
> the PCI HW if you like.
I tested the following setup:
# eth0 setup:
ip addr add $IP dev eth0
ip link set up dev eth0
ip route add default via $DEF_ROUTE
# bridge setup:
brctl addbr br0
brctl setfd br0 0
Then I tested the following migration sequence to move the IP addresse to br0:
ip addr add $IP dev br0
ip link set up dev br0
brctl addif br0 eth0
ip addr del $IP dev eth0
ip route add default via $DEF_ROUTE
Thanks to "brctl setfd br0 0", this migration cause no trouble to active
connections.
So I cannot find a good reason to try and use eth0 as the "main" bridge
interface.
Do you have a process really linked to eth0 ?
Nicolas.
_______________________________________________
Bridge mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
