Rajagopal Kunhappan wrote: > > Garrett D'Amore wrote: >> On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 13:24 -0700, Rajagopal Kunhappan wrote: >> >>> Garrett D'Amore wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 2007-08-14 at 23:26 -0600, Nicolas Droux wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Aug 13, 2007, at 12:02 AM, David Edmondson wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> Something else to consider is that in the future we are planning to >>>>>>> allow multiple VNICs to share a single MAC address. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> How will packets be de-multiplexed (a simple IP address based >>>>>> mechanism might not be sufficient)? >>>>>> >>>>> This still has to be designed properly, but for DHCP we'll most >>>>> likely use client IDs to demultiplex the DHCP replies. For IP traffic >>>>> of course the unicast IP address(es) associated with the VNICs will >>>>> be used. Other type of traffic might require special processing (e.g. >>>>> ARP). >>>>> >>>> Btw, a bunch of the 10/100 legacy NICs can support multiple MAC >>>> addresses fairly trivially. Should updating this be something I should >>>> be looking at? If there was a simple test suite to validate this >>>> feature, it would certainly help in getting the feature added. >>>> >>> There is no test suite :-(. But it can be tested easily by creating >>> VNICs and generating some traffic. >>> >> So you mentioned that the LDOMs folks wanted it on S10. Does that mean >> that there is some other consumer of this feature *today*? >> > Yes, LDOM vswitch uses it. We integrated this into S10 in Jan this year. > Is that still S10U4? >
Yes. The framework support went into s10u4_02 (snv_44) along with support for bge 6339368 Ability to set multiple MAC addresses to a network interface Support for e1000g went into s10u4_07 (snv_47) 6447914 e1000g should support setting of multiple unicast addresses -- Liam
