From owner-freebsd-net Tue Feb 6 11:23:17 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from wyattearp.stanford.edu (wyattearp.Stanford.EDU [171.64.180.171]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DEC637B401; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:23:00 -0800 (PST) Received: (from richw@localhost) by wyattearp.stanford.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA12268; Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:22:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from richw) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2001 11:22:03 -0800 (PST) From: Rich Wales X-Sender: richw@wyattearp.stanford.edu To: Luigi Rizzo Cc: Julian Elischer , patrick@netzuno.com, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG, julian@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BRIDGE breaks ARP? (more info) In-Reply-To: <200102060723.f167NG335858@iguana.aciri.org> Message-ID: <20010206190650.09873.richw@wyattearp.stanford.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I agree with Luigi's sentiments on the current bridging vs. netgraph. I'll be more than happy to switch over to using netgraph bridging, as soon as it has the features I need -- specifically, firewall filtering via ipfw, ipfilter, or something equivalent. Lack of filtering in the current netgraph code is, for me, a non-negotiable showstopper. Until that's been dealt with, I need the current bridging code to work properly. I'm very grateful for everything that people have been doing in this regard during the past several days. My bridge basically seems to be running OK now. The only remaining problem I'm aware of right now (and it's a nuisance, but not a showstopping bug) is the "dueling ARP reply" issue, where both interfaces on the bridge are advertising themselves to my desktop system. Rich Wales richw@webcom.com http://www.webcom.com/richw/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message