Bug 8218 - 8021q - Vlan - Tag lost/missing on base interface when sniffing.
Summary: 8021q - Vlan - Tag lost/missing on base interface when sniffing.
Status: REJECTED WILL_NOT_FIX
Alias: None
Product: Networking
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Other (show other bugs)
Hardware: i386 Linux
: P2 low
Assignee: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-03-16 06:30 UTC by Pieter E Smit
Modified: 2008-09-26 05:04 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Kernel Version: 2.6.20
Subsystem:
Regression: ---
Bisected commit-id:


Attachments

Description Pieter E Smit 2007-03-16 06:30:57 UTC
Most recent kernel where this bug did *NOT* occur: Unknown
Distribution:Debian
Hardware Environment:Laptop
Software Environment:
Problem Description:8021q vlan, tags not visible on base interface.
e.g. create vlans #vconfig add eth1 330
tcpdump -i eth1
ping [via eth1.330]
The dump has no vlan info/tag
If sniffing on a interface connected to a trunk port on a switch the tags can be
seen.

Steps to reproduce:
create a vlan
add a subnet to the vlan interface
run ping out the interface
sniff on base interface.

if done with 2 vlans, the base interface displays the traffic from both,
interleaved with no vlan tags.
Comment 1 Ben Greear 2007-03-16 14:41:09 UTC
This will be the case with any NIC that does hw-acceleration (e1000 and most
other newer NICs).

It would require modifying the driver to not advertise it's vlan hw-accel and
not strip tags internally for this sniffing to work.

It is possible you could get the NIC driver writer(s) to allow the
VLAN-HW-ACCEL to be disabled, so please redirect this bug to them.
Comment 2 Pieter E Smit 2007-03-18 09:33:02 UTC
Is there real value to HW vlan acceleration ? 
Adding and removing 4bytes form a packet header ? 
CRC HW acceleration makes sense as it is a CPU intensive task.

Being able to see the packets as they on the wire entering and leaving the
interface is valuable, and a great debugging tool.
Comment 3 Natalie Protasevich 2007-07-07 17:19:01 UTC
What's the course of action? This seems quite useful to have headers for sniffing, maybe it should be some configurable option (like module parameter) that driver would implement. But I agree this seems to be driver's task. You may want to bring up this topic on LKML for discussion.
Thanks.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.