On April 18, 2018 6:54:07 PM GMT+03:00, Stephen Hemminger
wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:14:26 +0300
>Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
>
>> On 18/04/18 16:07, Joachim Nilsson wrote:
>> > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 03:31:57PM +0300, Nikolay
On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 16:14:26 +0300
Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> On 18/04/18 16:07, Joachim Nilsson wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 03:31:57PM +0300, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> >> On 18/04/18 15:07, Joachim Nilsson wrote:
> >>> - First of all, is this patch
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 04:14:26PM +0300, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> We want to avoid sysfs in general, all of networking config and stats
> are moving to netlink. It is better controlled and structured for such
> changes, also provides nice interfaces for automatic type checks etc.
Aha,
On 18/04/18 16:07, Joachim Nilsson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 03:31:57PM +0300, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
>> On 18/04/18 15:07, Joachim Nilsson wrote:
>>> - First of all, is this patch useful to anyone
>> Obviously to us as it's based on our patch. :-)
>> We actually recently discussed what
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 03:31:57PM +0300, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> On 18/04/18 15:07, Joachim Nilsson wrote:
> > - First of all, is this patch useful to anyone
> Obviously to us as it's based on our patch. :-)
> We actually recently discussed what will be needed to make it acceptable to
>
On 18/04/18 15:07, Joachim Nilsson wrote:
This RFC patch¹ is an attempt to add multicast querier per VLAN support
to a VLAN aware bridge. I'm posting it as RFC for now since non-VLAN
aware bridges are not handled, and one of my questions is if that is
complexity we need to continue supporting?
This RFC patch¹ is an attempt to add multicast querier per VLAN support
to a VLAN aware bridge. I'm posting it as RFC for now since non-VLAN
aware bridges are not handled, and one of my questions is if that is
complexity we need to continue supporting?
>From what I understand, multicast