[systemd-devel] [PATCH] Add FDB support

"J├│hann B. Gu├░mundsson" johannbg at gmail.com
Fri Dec 12 08:41:28 PST 2014

On 12/12/2014 04:12 PM, Rauta, Alin wrote:
> Hi,
> [BrigdeFDB] can be also fine. It's just that [BridgeFDB] makes you think at the entire forwarding database table and you are actually defining only one entry.
> [BridgeFDBEntry] makes you think at just one entry in that table.


So it can grow quite large with multiple entries along with all the 
other bridging features.

At this point in time I'm actually wondering if it would not be better 
to introduce type .bridge networkd file to cover all current and future 
bridge features ( for example you probably want to be able to define 
that 802.1ad tag in an [Bridge] section as well right? )  as opposed to 
be cluttering the .network file with all of those options.

Do you have any number of how many various type bridge entries will need 
to be supported by networkd in the long run?


More information about the systemd-devel mailing list