Put in a PR to add TTL security for static LDP neighbors.

it sounds good to me.
I personally think the days with manually locking nic queues to cpu's is a bit outdated and we need something more dynamic.
After reading a bit on tuned i give my thumbs up

Hey, it seems that the big trouble now is the difference in the definition of the command line. If possible, I agree to conduct a survey to see your opinions.

@c-po i agree with using "native-vlan", but i dont agree on using "allowed-vlan".
"allowed-vlan" for me it dosn't actually describe that this vlan will be tagged on the port

Please try again with the next rolling release.

OK, I understand, PR has been updated

As I'm raised by A vendor starting with C and now switched to another vendor starting with A they both reference the function as native-vlan and allowed-vlan - this makes it easier for users which operate cross-platform.

set interfaces bridge br0 member interface eth0 allowed-vlan 2,4-9
set interfaces bridge br0 member interface eth0 native-vlan 101

The following writing methods can currently be used, such as:

I really like the idea of this interface and alwaysed watned to implement it - but I lacked of time, so first thank you @jack9603301 for picking this up.

It seems to be the same as the task list, but my basic realization is basically completed, see:

If two different vlan processing methods are not used for the same interface, then the two are not currently in conflict, unless the user sets vlan filter and eth0.10 on the same interface at the same time

I wonder what happens if I have a eth0.10 bridge member interface? Also what should happen when the user jas eth0 and eth1.10 bridge members? should this feature still work or is it exclusively only for native non vlan interfaces?

@runar The modified command is as follows:

@runar There is a question, that is, how to set the pvid flag according to this command format? Is the pvid flag automatically attached to the untagged option by default?

Hmm.. i have a few sugestions about the syntax.
The linux kernel allows the user to have different pvid vlan's on ingress and egress of a router port,.

• this is if you ask me not a common use case and i think we should merge the pvid(ingress) and untagged(egress) so that they will be ONE command..
• my second note is that the syntax shown above is quite verbose when creating a lot of vlan's and interfaces. consider creating 20 vlans on 5 ports, that will make a minimum of 100 lines of code in the config.

i would like to purpose a different syntax like this:

# Enable vlan filtering
set interfaces bridge br1 vlan

PR: https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/594

Hello everyone

@c-po I think you may have referred to the wrong worksheet in your WiFi implementation? This task list is used to track and implement the VLAN filter of the bridge and the VLAN sub interface pairs of SVI

Yes! Turns out the following is what fixed it:
https://phabricator.vyos.net/T2980

@trae32566 Are there any updates for this task?

@dmbaturin It should. It was vyos-hostsd and some of the rewrite to python that caused the issue initially.

@kroy Thanks for the fix! Is crux free from this problem?

PR https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/593
Fix validators for "neighbor update-source"

This PR should fix this for now.

Duplicate of https://phabricator.vyos.net/T2465

It can be work with XFRM interfaces https://wiki.strongswan.org/projects/strongswan/wiki/RouteBasedVPN#XFRM-interfaces-in-VRFs

@liljenstolpe good to have someone else interested in getting this sorted out!

PR https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/591

@thomas-mangin They specifically ask folks to do the vendor cluster route.

The application process is pretty simple, you need to provide a few pieces of information:

PBKS

I can confirm that this is working.

It turns out that you know that a separate command is set to execute this layout setting, but I think the setting of your command is unreasonable because the user will mistakenly think that the following command can be used to set a specific layout:

PR https://github.com/vyos/vyos-1x/pull/590
I hope it will be helpful for many people from France. As for me it better solution then glue stickers with QWERTY keys =)

@Viacheslav vlans are working fine.

@phillipmcmahon Try to check if vlan works correctly without DHCP?
I met several nuances associated with vlans on ESXi.

I just tried replacing my vyos vlan DHCP scopes with a relay and passing back to my Windows 2019 server that is already set up and working as a DHCP server for my main LAN.

The support of keyboard layout has always been a relatively complex and user experience issue. I am in China, so I can only say that the country where I am is usually using American keyboard, while other countries such as Korea, Japan and so on, their keyboard layout is.... Keyboard layout should not be a major obstacle in most countries

Ok, let's review the situation when you install VyOS on bare metal and you have an only AZERTY keyboard. You press key A but in console, you see Q, you press Z on the console you see W.
Debian way, install console-data from https://packages.debian.org/sid/console-data and run sudo loadkeys fr

I think the default keyboard layout should be based on the American layout, and allow switching between custom keyboard layouts (in Debian, it should be possible to use dpkg-reconfigure for configuration)

To add the possibility to switch from default QWERTY keyboard type to AZERTY.

I don't understand. Do you mean that users should be allowed to set keyboard layout?