From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-vc0-f176.google.com (mail-vc0-f176.google.com [209.85.220.176]) (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 0D0D0202102 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2013 13:17:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-vc0-f176.google.com with SMTP id fo13so15836588vcb.35 for ; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 13:17:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=9JVhWbfbBqi8BhVGDUDGFf+iMsDYFW6L7vEonPchOKY=; b=JpnQbfsCPIa8WXna3O5ZFiSTII6myJh4nHIm2X+zSZMxBftMyF2gxzR63wJf5RiViV jnxfSWEr5tOg2gFNHKI9pZ5717vK9xyYl3UqY2O56P4HsJRn1em92d0IBy40yUMTGdJq fNFp2CQVdtKfqO5OKKzPanfQ0lNcoMMNvUEhUwB0m+aUtpXQIhJzKoV4uPJ+ziwAHiaJ 6jAjDU7ws48LR3jP7RQNG9EkwtU0xWUnpZgRgcH6IciTfMXMqlMd/WU5pw+Qow9MqSI4 pwRsBucKiuudqqcG4ELLzXcQtKKcEA7WPxO6U8KsOG5bamF2V7Gg4rl+o/4HEJAoO/ay CnSQ== X-Received: by 10.58.222.40 with SMTP id qj8mr77487585vec.36.1357247871763; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 13:17:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:4830:1600:423::2? (cl-1060.qas-01.us.sixxs.net. [2001:4830:1600:423::2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a10sm42912379vez.10.2013.01.03.13.17.50 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 03 Jan 2013 13:17:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50E5F57E.2010602@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 16:17:50 -0500 From: William Katsak User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.11) Gecko/20121127 Thunderbird/10.0.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] breaking off a port off the vlan correctly? 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, 03 Jan 2013 21:17:53 -0000 Dave, I didn't get really far into this, but I recently did the following with Sugarland: DSL Modem -> Cero router -> Trunk two VLANS through port 1 -> Managed switch. On the managed switch, I made some of the ports part of VLAN 100, and others part of VLAN 200. VLAN 100 lets a Windows server do DHCP/DNS, and VLAN 200 lets dnsmasq do it (its like a "guest" network). I can route between the networks with no issues, and set firewall rules as I wish. I did this by splitting the LAN port into two VLANs in the GUI, setting rules for DHCP, etc. accordingly, and then passing both VLANS tagged through port 1 on the switch. This is a little different than what you propose, but should work exactly the same if you were to break the VLANs onto two individual ports of the switch. Is there some fundamental difference that I am missing? -Bill Katsak On 01/03/2013 03:31 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > One of the things I've long ignored, despite the popularity of it, is > vlan stuff. > > I care, like everything else, it's just not currently a high priority > for me to deal with high rate vlan traffic. > > But: I just had a need to connect two entirely separate networks > together. Being me I just slammed a routed dreamplug between the two > lans (which just worked five minutes after I compiled babeld and > turned off getting default gateways from dhcp), but it seems saner to > just remap one of the ports on a wndr3800 to be its own ethernet > device (and keep hacking BQL onto the dreamplug, which is what I have > it for) > > current config: > > default gw box<-> cerowrt<-> dreamplug<-> other network > > desired config: > > default gw box<-> cerowrt<-> dedicated port<-> other network > > However, in trying to do that, several ways, I made bricks. > > Wrong way #1: turn on vlan support, create an untagged vlan #2 on port > #3 from the switch, disable port #3 from vlan 1, create an interface > for it (I did all this via the gui), rebooted... > > The box stopped serving dhcp entirely. IPv4 stopped too. I did see > ipv6 traffic... > > Left off vlan support, never saw any traffic on the broken out port, > dhcp stopped working on ethernet entirely but stayed up on wifi... I > tried various combinations of using se00.1 and se00.2 to similar > non-effect... > > Sigh. In reading up on this on openwrt's web site I'm even more > confused than i was before. > > I seem to recall that other parties have tried this and went through > hell, too... > > Anybody got this to work? > > Secondly: My assumption is that you run fq_codel on the underlying > interface, not the vlan, am I correct in this? > > > >