From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Ahern Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/5] net: L2 only interfaces Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:52:18 -0700 Message-ID: <55DCFFB2.1030100@cumulusnetworks.com> References: <1440543015-14693-1-git-send-email-f.fainelli@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev , David Miller , andrew@lunn.ch, linux@roeck-us.net, =?UTF-8?B?SmnFmcOtIFDDrXJrbw==?= , sfeldma@gmail.com To: Sowmini Varadhan , Florian Fainelli Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f52.google.com ([209.85.220.52]:34252 "EHLO mail-pa0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752896AbbHYXwU (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Aug 2015 19:52:20 -0400 Received: by pabzx8 with SMTP id zx8so48743004pab.1 for ; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:52:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 8/25/15 4:44 PM, Sowmini Varadhan wrote: > On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> This patch series implements a L2 only interface concept which basically denies >> any kind of IP address configuration on these interfaces, but still allows them >> to be used as configuration end-points to keep using ethtool and friends. >> > > This is a very interesting idea. A few questions/thoughts: will there > be any eventual restrictions on which types interfaces can be L2_ONLY? > Ideally, it should be possible to let interfaces wink in/out of L2 only > state administratively (as can be done on a typical router, after unwinding > existing config as needed) > > I'm assuming something will prevent an L2-only interface from being > part of a vrf. The VRF driver can check the device when the enslave request happens.