Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > +----br0----+ > > | | > > veth0_a------------veth0 veth1--------veth1_b > > (192.168.10.10/24) (192.168.10.20/24) > > > > Using the MAC of the port, the packet is consumed by the bridge too and not > > forwarded. So, no need for it to be the MAC address of the bridge itself.. > > Thanks for confirming. > > But this is going to be a bit strange from usability point of view? > > It is easier to explain to users that by setting the br0 mac address > (as we do now) packets are passed up to the local stack. Fair point. So lets just go with this patch set, forget I said anything :-) Fernando, if you have some cycles, would you make a packetpath shell test for this to exercise the datapath? Thanks!
