Ok thanks, I agree this makes much more sense. As Luiz mentioned earlier, this exposes more explicitly the awkwardness of the "network" option for wifi-iface pointing to an interface rather than a device.
Related to this, is it possible to add a wireless interface to a bridge specifying a non-default PVID? I guess this is needed if one wants to run multiple wireless interfaces off a single bridge with different vlans. On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 at 08:53, Jo-Philipp Wich <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > One thing which is a bit awkward as long as the bridge itself is > > configured as an interface, is that as far as I have understood, > > creating a tagged interface to the bridge requires first setting up an > > interface for the bridge, e.g. with protocol Unmanaged, and then > > setting up one or more vlan tagged interfaces on top of it which can > > then be configured with ip addresses. > The following configuration: > > config interface foo > option type bridge > option ifname 'bar baz qrx' > option proto ... > > Is actually a convenience shortcut for: > > config device > option type bridge > option name br-foo > list ifname bar > list ifname baz > list ifname qrx > > config interface foo > option ifname br-foo > option proto ... > > So in order to define a bridge interface without IP configuration, > you could solely use: > > config device > option type bridge > option name mybridge0 > list ifname lan1 > list ifname lan2 > ... > > This has a couple of advantages: > > - You don't need a logical dummy interface > - You can get rid of the implicit "br-" prefix > - The resulting configuration becomes more explicit > > > Regards, > Jo > _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
