Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 03:49:26 -0000 From: "Max Laier" <max@love2party.net> To: <pf4freebsd@freelists.org> Subject: [pf4freebsd] Bridging 2nd try and call for testers Message-ID: <01ad01c370ab$a55b2bc0$01000001@max900> References: <200308262103.12394.alan@precisionautobody.com> <200308262247.46254.alan@precisionautobody.com> <01a901c36cee$09bd6810$01000001@max900> <200308271625.05235.alan@precisionautobody.com> <025801c36cfa$3e756290$01000001@max900> <1062074062.31217.14.camel@quark.avioc.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Brandon Weisz wrote:
> I tested your patch with basically the same setup as Alan. I'm using
> the pf port, not sure if I should be testing with 1.62.
>
> The quick and dirty is I didn't see any of the debug messages from
> bridge.c.diff in the dmesg.
>
> The results(?) along with my setup are attached.
okay ... after ripping off our hair for some days we finnally discovered the
real problem. It is a dirty hack to bring PFIL_HOOKS definition to pfil.h in
case you have IPFILTER definition. I'll send-pr about it, but would like you
to test something first:
get clean kernelsources and add the following to bridge.c:
Before the first include (<sys/param.h>):
> #ifndef KLD_MODULE
> #include "opt_pfil_hooks.h"
> #endif
Then build your kernel with:
options BRIDGE #you need it built in!
options PFIL_HOOKS
and try again to get pf running. Remember to set net.link.ether.bridge_ipf:
1 This time it should at least see some packets ... or get a panic, not sure
about it ;)
Thank you for your help.
Max
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01ad01c370ab$a55b2bc0$01000001>