From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from MAIL1.WPI.EDU (MAIL1.WPI.EDU [130.215.36.91]) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAF0421F1FC for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:01:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from MAIL1.WPI.EDU (MAIL1.WPI.EDU [130.215.36.91]) by MAIL1.WPI.EDU (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id rBJL1BN1028964 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:01:11 -0500 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.8.3 MAIL1.WPI.EDU rBJL1BN1028964 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=wpi.edu; s=_dkim; t=1387486871; bh=e4AW+jydEjoGxowflH1c6ZKqPcY+A0d4IhD9+88MaMU=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:In-Reply-To; b=xt0B63Cl5r7XcqRNH0HsR66xj3se2BFnecyoOURY/6ZqKBaM6R/qQUVDFEIKNFp23 pTYMo2nGuZysbi2mjwlMwgrWqnjVooXMtp0AENdLoD9U0Ifc+KzsyzzXYXAwoWQW/D Q9G47ZbH9Xw7gefDr6UzdhrTl5n13UOkHp/hkRfY= Received: from SMTP.WPI.EDU (SMTP.WPI.EDU [130.215.36.186]) by MAIL1.WPI.EDU (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id rBJL1BSS028960 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:01:11 -0500 Received: from angus.ind.WPI.EDU (ANGUS.IND.WPI.EDU [130.215.130.21]) by SMTP.WPI.EDU (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id rBJL1Ace002060 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:01:10 -0500 (envelope-from cra@WPI.EDU) Received: from angus.ind.WPI.EDU (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by angus.ind.WPI.EDU (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id rBJL19nf004247 for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:01:09 -0500 Received: (from cra@localhost) by angus.ind.WPI.EDU (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id rBJL19Hh004246 for cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:01:09 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: angus.ind.WPI.EDU: cra set sender to cra@WPI.EDU using -f Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 16:01:09 -0500 From: Chuck Anderson To: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Message-ID: <20131219210108.GN1582@angus.ind.WPI.EDU> References: <20131217154345.0e91b65f@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> <1387379970.401720581@apps.rackspace.com> <18235.1387385681@sandelman.ca> <874n66yqcs.fsf@toke.dk> <4400ed3b15245d06d0bf73d22f7a7692@lang.hm> <27518.1387397235@sandelman.ca> <87zjnxxk3u.fsf@toke.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10) Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] treating 2.4ghz as -legacy? X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 21:01:13 -0000 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:05:21PM -0800, David Lang wrote: > On Thu, 19 Dec 2013, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: > > >David Lang writes: > > > >>I believe that Linux allows having both tagged and untagged packets on > >>the samy physical interface, so the APs could communicate on a VLAN > >>and one could be the gateway to the rest of the network (similar type > >>of overhead in this case to GRE tunnels in that all traffic would get > >>routed through one system, but I think it would still be less) > > > >What happens to the VLAN tags if the traffic goes through a > >non-VLAN-aware switch? > > non-aware switches will just pass the packets, reatining the tagging Mostly. Some non-VLAN-aware switches will drop frames larger than 1518 bytes (including FCS). The switch needs to support up to 1522 byte frames to support the normal IP MTU of 1500 bytes plus a 4-byte VLAN tag.