Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2005 14:31:06 -0700 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> To: Sten Daniel =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F8rsdal?= <lists@wm-access.no> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Marcin Jessa <lists@yazzy.org> Subject: Re: tap devices and DHCP. Message-ID: <20050925213106.GF15981@odin.ac.hmc.edu> In-Reply-To: <43329F4A.4050904@wm-access.no> References: <20050922092250.55b4716a.lists@yazzy.org> <20050922113336.K34322@fledge.watson.org> <20050922125003.67071cb1.lists@yazzy.org> <43329F4A.4050904@wm-access.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 02:10:50PM +0200, Sten Daniel Sørsdal wrote: > > > > > I have a bridge with one fxp0 nic (which I renamed to net0) and one tap1 > > device. The other end runs linux as DHCP server on LAN. > > It communicates with the DHCP server through the fxp0 device which is a > > member of the same bridge. > > > > Then it would in my opinion be more correct to run dhclient on the > bridge interface. > However bridge0 doesnt seem to support broadcast packets which are > necessary for DHCP to work. That could be the problem. It seems incorrect to be able to assign an address to an interface that is a member of an if_bridge bridge. I'm not 100% certain this is the case, but it seems right. If that's the case, dhclient should not work on member interfaces. -- Brooks -- Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDNxcXXY6L6fI4GtQRAktOAJ491j4KS1fPwvln+MFuyjKe2j7v/ACeJK+O ehCKhkJr5VG+tDo/ryYwN5w= =2mcr -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050925213106.GF15981>