From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-iw0-f171.google.com (mail-iw0-f171.google.com [209.85.214.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7B54201AEE; Sun, 8 May 2011 20:19:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iwn8 with SMTP id 8so6141590iwn.16 for ; Sun, 08 May 2011 20:26:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=mv2o6pV5S041gaxZZFyBb8rr6khF9OsxHsWqiyo0Rgk=; b=sfzvtytQhroV8cDxRrJUMYDuW/OYBB0jsL7XwZJhHI0xAxJXyjUBwEqRfmHOHgRmAq V6KA09OwQ0XlSuEZDg07vR7detjVVX9zfyys1qEah1/k5PoUUa8ZQCsp0hZ4ykZInHBH TSo/yGGN26Wp0rYfummGeFr+AL3K2/pZu3yzM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=cdK4Z7FwPYadkPjadH1lfOoXa6dCdi45LLnbc+QhMdUeXFaH7b5E2SYhcKDK/tbxHI jlEOoh9ewQrBRyZyj+w7DhXMan39g12WxecQaA4HjX2iAoh9AuCFngHxx+U5ISgH+xyc Rc0YdfnieVe/BTmnYm9XGcep2DFiRgMpoLBGE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.69.198 with SMTP id a6mr789061ibj.181.1304911568678; Sun, 08 May 2011 20:26:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.31.201 with HTTP; Sun, 8 May 2011 20:26:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 21:26:08 -0600 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: bloat , bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015176f130083ae7a04a2cf660d Subject: [Bismark-devel] ipv6 fe80:: addresses, vlans and bridges... borked? X-BeenThere: bismark-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: BISMark related software development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 May 2011 03:19:59 -0000 --0015176f130083ae7a04a2cf660d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am modestly stumped as to how to solve this properly. I think it's been causing problems with ipv6 for a long time, but I could be wrong. see http://www.bufferbloat.net/issues/126 Basically although the underlying interfaces do have unique mac addresses (for some reason the underlying eth0 interface is sharing a mac address wit= h the wlan0 interface??), the bridged to a vlan fe80:: addresses are all the same. This strikes me as a problem. Is there a standard for renaming fe80:: addresses to represent they are interfacing with different vlans? --=20 Dave T=E4ht SKYPE: davetaht US Tel: 1-239-829-5608 http://the-edge.blogspot.com --0015176f130083ae7a04a2cf660d Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am modestly stumped as to how to solve this properly. I think it's be= en causing problems with ipv6 for a long time, but I could be wrong.
see http://www.bufferbl= oat.net/issues/126

Basically although the underlying interfaces do have unique mac address= es (for some reason the underlying eth0 interface is sharing a mac address = with the wlan0 interface??),

the bridged to a vlan fe80:: addresses = are all the same. This strikes me as a problem.

Is there a standard for renaming fe80:: addresses to represent they are= interfacing with different vlans?

--
Dave T=E4ht
SKYPE: dave= taht
US Tel: 1-239-829-5608
http://the-edge.blogspot.com
--0015176f130083ae7a04a2cf660d--