From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <david@lang.hm>
Received: from bifrost.lang.hm (mail.lang.hm [64.81.33.126])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC9AB208AAD
	for <cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>;
	Thu, 19 Dec 2013 12:05:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asgard.lang.hm (asgard.lang.hm [10.0.0.100])
	by bifrost.lang.hm (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id
	rBJK5LsM010998; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 12:05:21 -0800
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 12:05:21 -0800 (PST)
From: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm
To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Toke_H=F8iland-J=F8rgensen?= <toke@toke.dk>
In-Reply-To: <87zjnxxk3u.fsf@toke.dk>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1312191204490.26048@nftneq.ynat.uz>
References: <CAA93jw7wRuadsrU0MXJt5FspyYTV1ZPuOv=7DMojTWssXG_Sog@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1312161327510.6430@nftneq.ynat.uz>
	<52AF797E.6030600@imap.cc> <18972.1387302855@sandelman.ca>
	<CAGhGL2Cd-g2j7f==3cpUFTRHyTQCkhmkyha20wZSw0aRWJTn4A@mail.gmail.com>
	<1387319157.48330794@apps.rackspace.com>
	<CAGhGL2Bfvm=kdJiQ8zPWjrENM5kymj2GnFSV87Sxe+7sGE0ObQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<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>
	<alpine.DEB.2.02.1312181209410.26048@nftneq.ynat.uz>
	<87zjnxxk3u.fsf@toke.dk>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="680960-25374301-1387483521=:26048"
Cc: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
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
	<cerowrt-devel.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/cerowrt-devel>,
	<mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel>,
	<mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 20:05:24 -0000

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--680960-25374301-1387483521=:26048
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:

> David Lang <david@lang.hm> 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

> Also, presumably you would need one VLAN/tunnel for each wireless
> network (so four in the default cerowrt setup)?

Yes.

David Lang
--680960-25374301-1387483521=:26048--