[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: MAC address issue
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 10:54:09PM -0800, jonathan%dsg.stanford.edu@localhost
> In message <20080118170120.GL1868%che.ojctech.com@localhost>David Young writes
> >Let us put aside lladdr preferences, and use only the 'active' flag,
> >instead. Only one lladdr may be active at a time, deleting an active
> >lladdr is not allowed (EBUSY), and setting a second lladdr to 'active'
> >clears the 'active' state on every other lladdr.
> Huh? What about hardware capable of, and IETF protocols which call
> for, multiple active link-level addresses on a single interface??
Do those exist? I wasn't aware of that. Can you name one, so that
we can consider the exact interface model used? E.g.
> Are you proposing a user/kernel API which makes those ~impossible?
I'm actually needing this, because the per-Macaddr-limit in German
Telekom's PPPoE routers is set to 1, and I'm using two providers
simultaneously. I'm emulating this using bridge(4) and tap(4). I
guess this is not desirable in the high performance case.
But wouldn't sub-interfaces (similar to what Solaris does) be easier
seal your e-mail: http://www.gnupg.org/
Main Index |
Thread Index |