similar to: Linux bridging and cascaded switches

Is it even possible or even worth while to do layer 3 switching (bridging) on a Linux system? Or would this be considered routing even though everything is done on OSI Layer 2? Which would be faster, Layer 3 switching (bridging) on OSI Layer 2 or routing on OSI Layer 3? Grant. . . .

Hello list, I've posted here about this before, but I realise that it may have been assumed that the bridged vlans simply put a switch port in a blocking state and left my question ignored. So to recap. I have two tg3 interfaces named 'in' and 'out' and a bridge named 'br0' My vlan trunk is on the 'in' side of the network, and set as in.2, in.3 ... The

Here are some notes I have about Linux bridging. I''ll try to separate what I know I know from what I think I know. Let''s say I want to bridge eth0, eth1, and eth2 together, all with an IP Address of, say, 1.2.3.2. This is how to do it: echo "Setting up br0 to bridge eth0 with eth1 and eth2" /usr/sbin/brctl addbr br0 /usr/sbin/brctl addif br0 eth0

Hi there, I have a question with regards to cascading multiple HTB qdiscs. Assume that I want to build the following hierarchy: (qdisc htb 1:0) -> (class htb 1:1) -> (qdisc htb 2:0) -> (class htb 2:1) -> (class htb 2:2) I want to attache aggregate u32 filters at 1:0 for supernets, then at 2:0 (and 3:0, 4:0, etc), I attach the more specific u32 filters for say HTTP and

Hello all, I am new to Linux Ethernet bridging. Let me first start with what I am trying to achieve. Well you see - I am attempting to have 2 main firewall running at the same time - one as a master and the other one as a slave. Yes, I would like to make use of Ethernet bridging in this scenario - as I understand it, all I need are two machines and STP enabled. I am running Debian

Hello, I have a transparent bridge/firewall setup using linux-2.6.3. My iptables commands for the firewall seem to work fine, but my tc traffic shaper rules dont. The tc rules seem to apply ok, but have no effect. Here are my tc rules. Basically im just trying to limit each IP in my internal /24 to 512k of bandwidth in and out. DEV=eth0 tc qdisc del dev $DEV root tc qdisc add dev $DEV

Paul, On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:47 PM, Digimer <lists at alteeve.ca> wrote: > On 17/03/16 04:47 PM, paul.greene.va at verizon.net wrote: > > Thanks, I followed the 2nd article, and it got the existing virtual > > machines communicating with each other. > Right, so your VMs are on the same bridge group now (at Layer2 of OSI). > > > > However, any new

I''m working with LEAF boxes as gateway machines. I''m trying to implement Proxy-ARP to build a bandwidth manager for my network. I''ve gone as per the lartc howto to implement a transparent bridge in an existing network and plan to put in my tc script after this. I''m configuring the box as a standalone one before plugging it into the network. I''m getting

I have a computer with two interfaces, say with addresses 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.1.2. I want to set up routing such that when I ping 192.168.1.1 it goes out through 192.168.1.2 and not to the local interface. Is this possible - all my attempts so far have been unsuccessful? If so, pointers, etc. would be gratefully appreciated. Jim -- Jim Redman (505) 662 5156 x85

Hello! I have the following setup: 1) a connection to my ISP with a public IP (1.2.3.4) with the gateway 1.2.3.1 2) an allocated IP class with 64 addresses (5.6.7.192/26) 3) two LANs connected through two NICs: a) 192.168.0.0/24 on eth1 (192.168.0.1) b) 10.0.0.0/24 on eth2 (10.0.0.1) The IPs from the allocated class are all assigned to eth0. The networks are SNATed to the external IP and

Here is a puzzle. I have a network with several servers. It''s a mess. It''s a /24 and pieces and servers are all over the place inside this /24 block, on both sides of the firewall. For example, the router at 1.2.3.1 is outside the firewall and many of the servers at 1.2.3.nnn/24 are behind the firewall. (Obviously, 1.2.3.nnn is a fudged network.) eth0 points outward to

Hello there, Can anyone help me with a problem i have.... I have an ethernet LAN, made over dumb fast-ethernet switches (10/100mbit) without management, so there is no IP for the switches. What I want, if possible, is to find out if a switch is down or not. It''s like with routers... if you want to find out if a router is OK, either you send ICMP directly to the router, or to a host

I have read several articles for setting up a network bridge. My configuration is: WorkStation --> Switch0:VLAN1 --> Switch1:VLAN1 --> bridge --> Switch1:VLAN45 --> Laptop I am running CentOS 4.3 on the bridge #> brctl show bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces br0 8000.0030843e5aa2 no eth1

Hi all, I am trying to come up with an architecture that has some redundancy. The idea is to hook up the two GbE LAN interfaces of a CentOS server to two Gigabit Ethernet switches. In case one switch goes down, there is a redundant path (the server is redundant too). Here is the idea: ----------- | GbE | PCs

Hi All, I''m trying to do some traffic shaping on an ethernet bridge. Currently, I have the following setup working: ifconfig eth0 down brctl addbr br0 brctl addif br0 eth0 brctl addif br0 eth1 brctl stp br0 off ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0 up ifconfig eth1 0.0.0.0 up ifconfig br0 up This creates a bridge consisting of eth0 and eth1. So far so good. I now want to use tc to shape traffic

Hi, This may sound crazy but I will go ahead anyway. Here's my scenario: ifconfig bond0 10.10.10.1 netmask 255.0.0.0 ifenslave bond0 eth0 ifenslave bond0 eth1 brctl addbr stp0 brctl addif stp0 bond0 brctl stp stp0 on Is this a valid scenario? I am trying to bond two interfaces and run STP over the bonded interface..The problem I am trying to solve is to run STP over aggregated links

Hello, Is routing within the same network possible? If it is, what configuration should I put for the firewall/router shown below? I basically want the host debian13 to be able to send packets via a multi-homed firewall. I think the multi-homed firewall involve some routing. +-------------------+ |debian13 | |eth0:192.168.0.13 | +-------------------+ |eth0 |

Hi I am testing running tinc in switch mode. , my topology is as follows Site 1 (tinc-srv01) -> Site 2 (tinc-srv02) I have configured the bridge interfaces with ip addresses and able to ping between bridges. I then setup a server on each site and tested layer 2 connectivity between the two servers. Topology as follows. Server 1 - *Site 1* (tinc-srv01) -> *Site 2* (tinc-srv02) - Server 2

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Is there a way to prevent hwaddr/mac address spoofing between DomU''s? So in a way ''binding'' a mac-address on boot time with a virtual interface? (with something like ebtables/arptables/etc?) Stefan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -

I have a question about bridges, vlans and switches. We had been using a bridge to provide filtering between our student labs and the main network. All the filtering does is check that a known IP matches a known MAC address, this stops students plugging in laptops and stealing an IP address. (And yes, we know about the MAC spoofing issues too) The connection was nice and simple,