Re: improvements

[Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>]

>> Create multiple vlan(4) interfaces per port and have each vlan(4)
>> interface be a member of a different bridge(4) domain.
> I'm not sure I like this.  This is the opposite of how you manage a
> real switch (hp, cisco, etc ...).  On these device, you have a single
> view of the switching fabric, with vlan tag information when
> pertinent.

So they're different; that doesn't make either one wrong.

On a "real switch", the things that on NetBSD are bridge interfaces are
implicit; they have no visibility in the interface - there is
implicitly one per vlan, so there is nothing to configure except which
vlan(s) a each non-trunk port belongs to, and which tags are acceptable
on each trunk port.  That NetBSD configures this information via the
vlan pseudo-devices rather than the underlying interface devices
reflects its more general-purpose nature.

I actually prefer the NetBSD way...though I do wish vlan(4) had a way
to configure a vlan interface to get/generate untagged packets or, for
input, packets with a tag not otherwise claimed.

/~\ The ASCII                             Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML                mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email!           7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B