similar to: [Bridge] igmp snooping ?

Hi All, I have to develop IGMPSnoop application within kernel 2.6. For the same purpose, I would have to Snoop L3 level IGMP packet at L2 level(Bridging level). Can anybody suggests how it can be done. Does Netfilter library support this kind of feature. Thanks In Anticipation Maverick -- _______________________________________________ LARTC mailing list LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl

The testsuite that checks for mcast_max_groups functionality will need to wipe the added groups as well. Add helpers to build an IGMP or MLD packets announcing that host is leaving a given group. Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm at nvidia.com> --- tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/lib.sh | 50 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+) diff --git

Currently we would still potentially suffer multicast packet loss if there is just either an IGMP or an MLD querier: For the former case, we would possibly drop IPv6 multicast packets, for the latter IPv4 ones. This is because we are currently assuming that if either an IGMP or MLD querier is present that the other one is present, too. This patch makes the behaviour and fix added in "bridge:

These functions will be helpful for other testsuites as well. Extract them to a common place. Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm at nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch at nvidia.com> --- .../selftests/net/forwarding/bridge_mdb.sh | 49 ------------------- tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/lib.sh | 49 +++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 49

Hi, Here are two, small feature changes I would like to submit to increase the usefulness of the multicast snooping of the bridge code. The first patch is an unaltered one I had submitted before, but since it got no feedback I'm resubmitting it here for net-next. With the recently added patch to disable snooping if there is no querier (b00589af + 248ba8ec05 + 8d50af4fb), it should be a safe

Hello all, I subscribed newly to this list, since I got an bridging problem after an upgrade from Debian etch to Debian lenny (before everything worked fine). The situation is as follows: # brctl show bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces br0 8000.000347729835 no eth0 tap0 tap0

The testsuite that checks for mcast_max_groups functionality will need to generate IGMP and MLD packets with configurable number of (S,G) addresses. To that end, further extend igmpv3_is_in_get() and mldv2_is_in_get() to allow a list of IP addresses instead of one address. Signed-off-by: Petr Machata <petrm at nvidia.com> --- tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/lib.sh | 22

I am battling an issue with use of bridging with xen. For some yet undetermined reason supposedly relating to stp, they assign a mac address of fe:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff to the bridge. Was hoping someone here may be able to elaborate on that. If I enslave a bridge to an ethernet, and than restart that network interface, should the bridge operation behave the same after the ip interface is restarted?

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1079 Bug ID: 1079 Summary: nft-0.6: segfault on add rule ip filter INPUT ip protocol igmp counter accept Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5

I can think of several potential differences. ?You may miss any bridge specific traffic (STP, LLDP) using the interfaces generated by the bridge itself. If you have vlan tagged sub interfaces you might also miss that traffic if you were snooping a particular interface. Obviously you will miss any on-wire broadcast traffic specific to the layer1 connection a particular interface was connected to

From: Cong Wang <amwang at redhat.com> This is a long-standing bug and reported several times: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880035 http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=136164389416341&w=2 This bug can be observed in virt environment, when a KVM guest communicates with the host via multicast. After some time (should be 260 sec, I didn't measure), the multicast

Hello Users, I googled Call Snooping, its shows only the it means, But i didn't find How to dialplan the Call Snooping, I seen that " What is Trixbox " in Asterisk I Use only some Feature in Asterisk (20), Is it need Asterisk to install the TrixBox in that same System where i installed the Asterisk Server Help me please :P -- Thanks and Regards Ravi Prakash Sunkara

This patch fixes the incorrect interpretation of endianness of MLDv2 maximum response code within bridge's multicast snooping code. Signed-off-by: Ang Way Chuang <wcang at sfc.wide.ad.jp> --- diff --git a/net/bridge/br_multicast.c b/net/bridge/br_multicast.c index 977c3ee..29c6283 100644 --- a/net/bridge/br_multicast.c +++ b/net/bridge/br_multicast.c @@ -1172,7 +1172,7 @@ static int

On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 15:43:30 +0700 <arkady-parabel@ngs.ru> wrote: > Hi. > > I'm using a powerpc-based board (CPU - Motorolla 82855, 50 > Mhz) with 32 Mb of RAM, Big Endian. > Linux kernel - 2.4.22, bridge - statically linked & as a > module > brctl - 0.9.6 > Ethernet - fec (arch/ppc/8xx_io/fec.c) > All this was compiled with gcc version 3.2.2 20030217

I''m rate limiting and prioritizing traffic upstream of a slow wan link using htb, classic wonder shaper type stuff. I''m using the following command for traffic that does not match any of my defined filters: tc qdisc add dev eth0 root handle 1: htb default 50 It appears that local, non-routable traffic like arps and igmp are being snared by this and end-up queued in the lowest

The BBC are currently trialling multicasting the Olympics. This requires multicast and IGMP to be available. As far as I can make out, in 2.0.8 at least, all multicast addresses are filtered out and, to my naive eyes, can''t be re-enabled. Please prove me wrong :-) Dirk -- Please Note: Some Quantum Physics Theories Suggest That When the Consumer Is Not Directly Observing This Message,

I''m try to insert a snooping/modifying application in a network without changing the network. That is, I want to take a linux box with two ethernet ports and put it between two existing systems without changing the original IPs. So, I want to change (for example) this: host(192.168.253.1) | | target(192.168.253.2) to: host(192.168.253.1) | |

Hi all, guys, first and foremost, i apologize, as this is not really about samba, but i'm basically at 'ground zero' with windows 10 and how to stop them from snooping information of the LAN PC windows users. And i know there is some great people with windows network understanding here on list, that is why i ask here, so please don't stone me :-) I think everyone heard

I have a Debian 8 64-bit machine set up as a server and apt-got the tinc package. I configured tinc as a bridge and everything seems normal except that the tunnel does not forward multicast traffic. I used tcpdump to examine the br0, eth0 and tap interfaces. I could see multicast packets on both br0 and eth0, but there is no such packet present on the tap interface. I don't quite know why

Hi all Assume that you have a linux bridge with two interfaces eth0 and eth1 enslaved to this bridge What is the difference between sniffing the bridge and sniffing its interfaces? tcpdump -i br0 vs tcpdump -i eth0 Thanks MiniME -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: