Re: MACVLANs really best solution? How about a bridge with multiple bridge virtual interfaces?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Eric W. Biederman
Date: Monday, March 9, 2009 - 2:17 pm

Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> writes:


I like that idea.  At least for prototyping.

I wonder if pkt_type all could be have a per interface optimized variant.


If well implemented it should not be more expensive than the ingress path where
we already have, and where we already do that.  Unless your traffic is highly
assymmetric.

Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: MACVLANs really best solution? How about a bridge with ..., Eric W. Biederman, (Sat Mar 7, 11:13 am)
Re: MACVLANs really best solution? How about a bridge with ..., Eric W. Biederman, (Mon Mar 9, 2:17 pm)