Linux Ethernet Bridging - Mar 2010 - [Bridge] bridge and ip addresses on enslaved interfaces

In the documentation I've seen so far a bridge is created with no IP address
for its enslaved interfaces and optionally with an IP address on the bridge
interface. For example, I create a bridge like so:

brctl addbr br0
brctl addif br0 eth0
brctl addif br0 eth1

ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0
ifconfig eth1 0.0.0.0
ifconfig br0 10.0.0.10 netmask 255.255.0.0


This works fine. However if I do the following:

ifconfig eth0 10.0.0.10 netmask 255.255.0.0
ifconfig eth1 10.1.0.10 netmask 255.255.0.0
ifconfig br0 0.0.0.0

the bridge gets created but I can't ping the IP addresses of the enslaved
interfaces. With the above configuration I am assuming that the enslaved
interfaces still behave independently of the bridge, can be assigned IP
addresses and participate in routes. My question is whether this is supported
and if I should expect it to work. If so, can someone point me to an example?

Thanks.



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/bridge/attachments/20100322/2a4aed88/attachment.htm

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 1:58 PM, Shawn Delaney <sdelaney at juniper.net>
wrote:
> In the documentation I?ve seen so far a bridge is created with no IP
address
> for its enslaved interfaces and optionally with an IP address on the bridge
> interface. For example, I create a bridge like so:
>
>
>
> brctl addbr br0
>
> brctl addif br0 eth0
>
> brctl addif br0 eth1


AFAIK, after this packets no longer arrive on the eth0 and eth1
logical interfaces.  Incoming packets have a receive interface of br0
(and which bridge port is stored for physdev-in matching).
>
>
>
> ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0
>
> ifconfig eth1 0.0.0.0
>
> ifconfig br0 10.0.0.10 netmask 255.255.0.0
>
>
>
>
>
> This works fine. However if I do the following:
>
>
>
> ifconfig eth0 10.0.0.10 netmask 255.255.0.0
>
> ifconfig eth1 10.1.0.10 netmask 255.255.0.0
>
> ifconfig br0 0.0.0.0
>
>
>
> the bridge gets created but I can?t ping the IP addresses of the enslaved
> interfaces. With the above configuration I am assuming that the enslaved
> interfaces still behave independently of the bridge, can be assigned IP
> addresses and participate in routes. My question is whether this is
> supported and if I should expect it to work. If so, can someone point me to
> an example?
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bridge mailing list
> Bridge at lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
>

Shawn Delaney schreef:
> In the documentation I've seen so far a bridge is created with no IP
address for its enslaved interfaces and optionally with an IP address on the
bridge interface. For example, I create a bridge like so:
>
> brctl addbr br0
> brctl addif br0 eth0
> brctl addif br0 eth1
>
> ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0
> ifconfig eth1 0.0.0.0
> ifconfig br0 10.0.0.10 netmask 255.255.0.0
>
>
> This works fine. However if I do the following:
>
> ifconfig eth0 10.0.0.10 netmask 255.255.0.0
> ifconfig eth1 10.1.0.10 netmask 255.255.0.0
> ifconfig br0 0.0.0.0
>
>   
Sounds like you want to make a brouter. You can use the ebtables broute
table for that. See:
http://ebtables.sourceforge.net/examples/basic.html#ex_brouter

cheers,
Bart


-- 
Bart De Schuymer
www.artinalgorithms.be