Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 20:33:57 -0000 (GMT) From: asegu@borgtech.ca To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Cc: "Nickolay A. Kritsky" <nkritsky@star-sw.com> Subject: Re: FW: Curiosity in IPFW/Freebsd bridge. [more] 802.1q VLAN at fault? Message-ID: <3721.161.53.212.202.1103488437.squirrel@borg.darktech.org> In-Reply-To: <721371959296.20041217154130@star-sw.com> References: <20041217094937.E4E6054C3@borgtech.ca> <721371959296.20041217154130@star-sw.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Ok, the whole discussion to date led to how VLAN traffic wasn't being registered by IPFW in my system. I think that it'll probably be too late for a code change to fix my problem, so I'm going to go the route of changing the network configuration. I've rebuilt to 4.10 and.. And I had no luck there (IPFW _really_ doesn't see the traffic now!). On the other hand, I've read about vlan pseudo-dev and goten myself access to the switch's configuration. So tomorrow evening I plan on changing the vlan id used to 3, and then in freebsd, use the following configuration(and I post this to the list to see if anybody knows that this is going to fail) fxp1 --> router (uses ID 2) fxp0 --> switch (uses ID 2, will switch to ID 3) ifconfig vlan1 vlan 3 vlandev fxp0 ifconfig vlan0 vlan 2 vlandev fxp1 sysctl net.link.ether.bridge_cfg=vlan1,vlan0 sysctl net.link.ether.bridge_ipfw=1 Does anybody think this will allow IPFW to see the packets? or that this will outright fail? Thank you everybody, Andrewhelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3721.161.53.212.202.1103488437.squirrel>