Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 08:32:45 -0700 From: "Crist J. Clark" <cristjc@earthlink.net> To: Simon Roockley <simonr@forward-comp.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bridging Message-ID: <20000707083245.A316@dialin-client.earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.1.20000707103250.00a889b0@pop3.forward-comp.co.uk>; from simonr@forward-comp.co.uk on Fri, Jul 07, 2000 at 10:33:00AM %2B0100 References: <4.3.2.7.1.20000707103250.00a889b0@pop3.forward-comp.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jul 07, 2000 at 10:33:00AM +0100, Simon Roockley wrote: > I am trying to set up bridging on a FreeBSD 4.0 machine. > > option BRIDGE has been added to the kernal config New kernel built and installed after the change, right? > net.link.ether.bridge=1 added to the /etc/sysctl.conf file > > On one end of the bridge (ep0) are devices with address XXX.XXX.0.XXX > netmask 255.255.0.0 > and on the other end of the bridge (ep1) are devices with the ip address of > XXX.XXX.50.XXX netmask 255.255.255.0 If you are bridging, forget about netmasks, they are meaningless. One thing I like to do to help me "think right" about the bridge (and not think routing) is to only put an IP address on one of the interfaces. > If either ep0 or ep1 are given address of XXX.XXX.50.XXX devices on both > sides can ping and telnet to that > address but not each other. > > Am I missing out anything obvious ? Are the clients on either side of the bridge configured properly? From the limited information you provided, it looks like all of the client machines should have a netmask of 0xffff0000, and the clients all have the correct default gateway which is _not_ the bridge, right? -- Crist J. Clark cjclark@alum.mit.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000707083245.A316>