From owner-freebsd-net Wed May 1 10:40:19 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (rwcrmhc51.attbi.com [204.127.198.38]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B4CF37B416 for ; Wed, 1 May 2002 10:40:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from InterJet.elischer.org ([12.232.206.8]) by rwcrmhc51.attbi.com (InterMail vM.4.01.03.27 201-229-121-127-20010626) with ESMTP id <20020501174008.CNNH9799.rwcrmhc51.attbi.com@InterJet.elischer.org>; Wed, 1 May 2002 17:40:08 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA72763; Wed, 1 May 2002 10:34:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 10:34:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: redjade@atropos.snu.ac.kr Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: divert part is missing in bridge? In-Reply-To: <20020502014111.A25698@ada.snu.ac.kr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org you are correct.. diversion is difficult because returned packets are handed tothe IPinout code which is obviously wrong for a bridged packet.. It's nto so complicated code however, so you may consider fully understanding the problem and solving it if you want a project :-) On Thu, 2 May 2002, Kyunghwan Kim wrote: > I made a bridge with two NICs and configured natd-ipfw stuff. > Then message below was seen. > "/kernel: bdg_forward: No rules match, so dropping packet!" > > Comments in bdg_forward() in bridge.c say that > /* > * XXX add divert/forward actions... > */ > Routine that handles diverted packets in bridge is not yet implemented? > > Regards, > Kyunghwan Kim > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message