> Table 1 shows N/A for Generic VLAN support on top of VLAN. Is this an > implementation constraint or an architectural constraint? The reason I'm > asking is that there are proposal for Q-in-Q encapsulations (Ethernet > packets with multiple VLAN headers in them). I don't know if Solaris > would ever be directly connected to such a thing, but it might make > sense to not have an architectural limitations preventing us to add > support for this should it become needed in the future.
Cathy can speak to the specifics of this with Vanity Naming, but administratively, this consideration is one of the main reasons we chose to model VLANs as links -- the proposed model requires no changes to create-vlan to dladm to support VLANs over VLANs. -- meem _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
