From owner-freebsd-net Mon Nov 9 01:33:53 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA04854 for freebsd-net-outgoing; Mon, 9 Nov 1998 01:33:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mail.calweb.com (mail.calweb.com [208.131.56.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA04848 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 1998 01:33:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkf@calweb.com) Received: by mail.calweb.com (8.8.6/8.8.6) with SMTP id BAA00145; Mon, 9 Nov 1998 01:31:04 -0800 (PST) X-SMTP: helo web2.calweb.com from jkf@calweb.com server jkf@web2.calweb.com ip 208.131.56.52 Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 01:31:04 -0800 (PST) From: "Jason K. Fritcher" To: Luigi Rizzo cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: router/bridge question In-Reply-To: <199811090414.FAA27210@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 9 Nov 1998, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > it should work, slightly suboptimally at the moment (i.e. it puts all > ethernet interfaces in promisc mode). Ok. That shouldn't be a problem. > I have some mods to let you do bridging only on clusters of interfaces, > but don't know when they will be ready for commit. In the meantime, if > the above is a problem for you, the best approach would be to skip your > "external" interface in the bridging loop. I might need to leave promiscious mode turned off on the external interface since it links to our backbone network, and I don't want to bog the machine down with trying to process every packet that arrives at that interface. > > For the internal network, I am going to be using a dual-port SMC card using > > the de driver. For the internet link, I am most likely going to be using an > > Intel EtherExpress. Looking at the comments at the top of bridge.c, it says > > to give only one interface an address. If this machine is also going to > > route between two networks, I am going to need to assign an address to the > > outside interface, and an address to the inside pair, but I have absolutely > > correct: one address to the card connection to the outside, one address > to one of the cards connected to the inside. Ok, so in my example, fxp0 would get an address from the external network, de0 would get an address from the internal network, and de1 would get no address, or would I need to give it the same address as de0? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jason K. Fritcher System Administrator jkf@calweb.com CalWeb Internet Services http://www.calweb.com/ 916-641-9320 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message