From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 10 11:37:19 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0987937B401 for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:37:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (xorpc.icir.org [192.150.187.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B49943F85 for ; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:37:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.8p1/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h6AIbFkN038576; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:37:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: (from rizzo@localhost) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.8p1/8.12.3/Submit) id h6AIbFZt038575; Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:37:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from rizzo) Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:37:15 -0700 From: Luigi Rizzo To: kw3wong@engmail.uwaterloo.ca Message-ID: <20030710113715.A37895@xorpc.icir.org> References: <1057778632.3f0c6bc8af474@www.nexusmail.uwaterloo.ca> <20030709195455.A24039@xorpc.icir.org> <1057860615.3f0dac07e1418@www.nexusmail.uwaterloo.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <1057860615.3f0dac07e1418@www.nexusmail.uwaterloo.ca>; from kw3wong@engmail.uwaterloo.ca on Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 02:10:15PM -0400 cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org cc: dsze@engmail.uwaterloo.ca Subject: Re: Question about bridging code X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 18:37:19 -0000 On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 02:10:15PM -0400, kw3wong@engmail.uwaterloo.ca wrote: > Hi Luigi, > >Thanks for response, the vmnet/tap stuff sounds like neat stuff. After reading >the description of tap (from the vtun site), the system seems to make a lot of >sense.However, I'm not sure how vmnet comes into play here - what purpose does >it serve, shouldn't I just be able to read from the /dev/tap0 and bridge >between tap0 and fxp0? It's just a naming issue, vmnetX is the network-device name of /dev/tapX. (the ip-equivalent thing, "tun", has the same name for both the network device and the device entry in the filesystem. As a matter of fact the latter is totally arbitrary so "tun" perhaps should be called "vmnet"...) Packets written by a process to /dev/tapX are seen by the network layer as coming from vmnetX; packets sent by the network layer to vmnetX can be read by a process from /dev/tapX > net.link.ether.bridge_cfg: fxp0:0,tap0:0 tap1:1 bge0:1 here you have to use the names vmnet0 and vmnet1 cheers luigi