similar to: [Bug 779] Netfilter on bridge interface containing a defective NIC

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=779 --- Comment #5 from calebc2099 at yahoo.com 2013-07-12 01:54:55 CEST --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > Have you tried to replicate the problem with a defective NIC? Here is an > > example of how to replicate the problem: > > Well, that is difficult since I do not own defective nics. But again: if

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=779 --- Comment #4 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-07-11 23:30:36 CEST --- (In reply to comment #3) > Have you tried to replicate the problem with a defective NIC? Here is an > example of how to replicate the problem: Well, that is difficult since I do not own defective nics. But again: if your NIC is defective,

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=779 --- Comment #7 from calebc2099 at yahoo.com 2013-07-14 02:02:26 CEST --- (In reply to comment #6) > I have tested this again, this time with different hardware. The bridge is > made up of an e1000 (eth1) and a pcnet32 (eth2) which DOES NOT SUPPORT > rx-checksum offloading. And again, everything worked perfectly and I saw no >

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=779 --- Comment #8 from calebc2099 at yahoo.com 2013-07-16 21:00:39 CEST --- (In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #6) > > I have tested this again, this time with different hardware. The bridge is > > made up of an e1000 (eth1) and a pcnet32 (eth2) which DOES NOT SUPPORT > > rx-checksum offloading. And again,

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=779 --- Comment #6 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-07-13 02:45:27 CEST --- I have tested this again, this time with different hardware. The bridge is made up of an e1000 (eth1) and a pcnet32 (eth2) which DOES NOT SUPPORT rx-checksum offloading. And again, everything worked perfectly and I saw no corrupt packets or incorrect

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=779 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com --- Comment #1 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-07-09

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=779 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #9 from Phil Oester <netfilter

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=779 --- Comment #2 from Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> 2013-07-09 03:41:43 CEST --- Further note: I was testing using e1000 nics. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are watching all bug changes.

I am trying to setup some rules on a box with 3 nic cards. Two internet connections and one office connection. eth0 is office eth1 is internet T1 eth2 is internet Cable when I do "iptables -F" then iptables -L everything is gone as it should be. Then I do iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -d $MYIP --dport 6550 -j DNAT --to $INTERNAL_ADDRESS:6550 iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -d

Hi, I have 2 internet connections (1 adsl/1 cable). I am try to route all outgoing mail from the mail server (on the same box), through the ADSL connection routing through the cable will mean mail will get rejected by AOL :( I am using qmail as the mail server. The configuration is: eth0 : cable connection ppp0 : adsl connection eth2 : internal lan connection I have configured split access as

Hello! I have a problem. May be here exist anyone who has encountered with the following problem. I have a router which is connected to 2 ISP from external side and one LAN internal interface. The feature is that the one ISP allocates a subnet xxx.xxx.xxx.160/28 for me but I split it into two subnets xxx.xxx.xxx.160/29 and xxx.xxx.xxx.168/29 and assign the latter to the internal interface. Also

Hi, I met a problem when using bridge with netfilter. The kernel version 2.4.20, and the patch is bridge-nf-0.0.10-against-2.4.20.diff. Our firewall configuration is as follows, eth3,eth4,eth5,eth6 configured as a bridge with an IP address 10.0.0.1. The local net connect to the internet via the gateway 10.0.0.1 and SNAT is applied on the firewall. It worked but sometimes there are some

Hello... I have the following problem: The usual way for a linux router to manage connections between 2 or more internet providers and an internal network is to SNAT the internal network into the (usually 1) external ip address that the provider has given us. My problem is that i dont wish to do SNAT (anymore) because my provider has given my a unique internet ip address for each pc so that my

Hi all i have big problem,I am newbie and my english is bad,but i know you can help solve my problem. I have box with gentoo,I live in latvia and i have 2 ISP: One isp gives me ip range from 62.85.71.1-62.85.71.15 (62.85.71.1 is gateway) but there is only latvian trafik - no other countries (link is 2 mbit Asinhronus dsl) and other isp who gives me one ip from dhcp adn there ios no trafik

Hi, thanks for a great piece of software! ...at the moment I have a commercial VPN box, which also acts as our firewall. I wish to replace this firewall functionality with a decicated Shorewall firewall, and use the VPN box only for VPN traffic. At the moment, this VPN/Firewall box is at an internet visible address, x.x.x.85 I wish to make the new Shorewall fireall x.x.x.85 and move the VPN to

I am so out of my depth on this one, but I would welcome some help. I have the following network and did get it to work with m0n0wall (a BSD firewall) an option called "transparent bridge". I've switched to Clark Connect because of its support for content filtering, and installed bridge-utils. I have a home network based a single WAN-facing NIC, eth0, that gets a public IP address

I am running 2.4.20 with Julian Anastasov''s patches (routes-2.4.20-9.diff), iptables v1.2.6a, iproute2-ss010824 on Debian. I have set up our internal gateway to multihome 2 T1''s as described in http://www.linuxvirtualserver.org/~julian/nano.txt . The only difference is that I use multiple IP''s on the external interfaces. EXA A.B.C.225 --------------------

I have a gentoo 2.6.14 box with 4 nics, LAN/DMZ/PUB1/PUB2 LAN and DMZ have a 1918 /22 each, PUB1 and PUB2 have a /29 each of which 5 ips are assigned. Using the mangle table, I give all packets a mark (according to local policies) in the range 1-10. Using ip rule, i pass marks 1-5 through the pub1 route table, and marks 6-10 through the pub2 routing table. Using the nat table, I SNAT to one

I have 2 internet connections and i;m trying to use squid as transparent proxy but every time squid is using first internet line but i want to use second internet line . i have this settings and without squid it''s working i have default route on the first internet connection. iptables -t nat -I POSTROUTING -o eth2 -p tcp --dport 80 -s 192.168.0.0/24 -d ! 192.168.0.0/16 -j SNAT --to

Hi, This is the first time I write to the list. My english is not so good, but I hope I''ll be understood. I have 4 adsl routers, plugged on a linux box, and this box e used to connect to a local network. The linux box has 5 NICs. eth0: local network inet 10.0.0.56/24 brd 10.0.0.255 scope global eth0 eth1: adsl router 1 inet 192.168.254.1/24 brd 192.168.254.255 scope global