On 20/08/10 09:53, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
Jonathan Tripathy a écrit :
However, in the /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf folder, I
don't see my "public" bridge, only the private one. Incidently, the
private one is the only bridge in my system that has an IP address
asigned to it...
Ok. May I ask what is your kernel version ? Older than 2.6.21 ?
Linux xx.xx.xx.xx 2.6.18-194.8.1.el5xen #1 SMP Thu Jul 1 19:41:05 EDT
2010 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
As I expected. A change occured in 2.6.21, recent kernels automatically
link interfaces to the IP stack.
So in my case, am I at a disadvantage
On the contrary, the old behaviour is an advantage if you don't want an
interface to participate in IP operation.
Excellent! If I were to upgrade at a later date, is it just a matter of
making sure that everything returns 0 in the above files?
Setting net.ipv4.conf.<interface>.forwarding=0 will disable forwarding
of IP packets received on<interface>. But I'm afraid it won't disable
all IP operation on it (ARP resolution, accept IP packets for local
delivery...)
Just out of interest, if routing was enabled on the Dom0, how would the
guests be able to use it, if the bridge that they were connected to
didn't have an IP address? Assuming that all IPs for the other
interfaces on the Dom0 were on a different subnet..
Thanks
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
