Thanks Stephen, ebtables looks like what I eventually need. I was able to resolve my short term problem by aliasing br0, and giving it a 192.168.10.1/24 address, so it receives traffic on both subnets. That seems to resolve the issue nicely. Thomas Taranowski Certified netburner consultant baringforge.com On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 19:16:18 -0700 > Thomas Taranowski <tom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> I have bridged eth0 and eth1, where eth0 is the world, and eth1 has >> some locally administered targets with normal IPs. On eth1, I also >> have some other devices with 192.168.x.x addresses I locally assigned. >> I'd like to give my eth1 a 192.168.x.x address, and treat the >> 192.168.x.x network as something like a local network, where anything >> else get's bridged across to eth0. I'm running into some problems. >> >> First, when I try to ping anything on the 192.168.x.x network, it >> get's sent out the wrong interface ( eth0 ), rather than eth1. I >> expected the bridge to broadcast the arp request to both interfaces. >> >> Second, giving eth1 an ip address, in addition to being bridged, had >> no obvious effect. Can I even do this? >> >> Any suggestions on where to look for additional information on this, >> or things to try? > > Don't put IP address on only one interface unless you are > setting up a brouter[1]. If you want to do firewalling then > add ebtables rules to block traffic; doing firewalling > with addressing won't work because the address won't be accessible > as you found out. > > > 1. A brouter requires additional ebtables to make packets flow. > _______________________________________________ Bridge mailing list Bridge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
