similar to: [Bridge] Setting the interfaces in promiscuous mode

Hi Everyone, In order to prevent DomU from entering promiscuous mode, is it just a matter of adding these 2 rules when the vif is created? # Accept packets leaving the bridge going to the domU only if # the destination IP for that packet matches an authorized IPv4 # address for that domU. iptables -A FORWARD -m physdev --physdev-out vif1.0 \ --destination 216.146.46.43 -j ACCEPT

Hello list! When em0 has an inet address while bridge0 doesn't, it seems to be OK: ----- bs1% uname -a FreeBSD bs1.sp34.ru 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #0: Sun May 25 20:15:26 MSD 2008 root@bs1.sp34.ru:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BSM i386 bs1% ifconfig em0; ifconfig tap0; ifconfig bridge0 em0: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500

Hello, I have the need to connect 2 remote site with vpn, the windows pc of the 2 site it can share the HD and printer. This is my configuration : LOCAL NETWORK A : ip from 192.168.10.2 to 192.168.10.99 | | | | eth0: 192.168.10.1 FIREWALL A : ( with debian ; openvpn ver. 2.0.beta15 ; shorewall ver 2.0.11 ) eth1 : xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx ( pubblic ip address ) | | | | INTERNET | | | eth1 :

I have a really basic question (I think). We have two boxes connected to a lan segment on a hub. One is a Windows box running "Show Traffic", the other is a CentOS 5 Linux box running "ntop". Both boxes should be able to sniff all of the traffic on that hub (not a switch). The Windows box does just fine, Show Traffic is able to display traffic destined for other boxes

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I'm trying to run a QEMU VM on top of a FreeBSD 7.x server ... I've tried the exact same setup on my desktop, using 192.168.1.x and an fxp device, and it all works perfectly, but as soon as I do this on another machine on a public IP, I'm not getting any routing, I can't even ping it from the same machine ... My first thought was

Here is the scenario: I have one server with kernel 2.4.24 with a bridge br0 made of 2 interfaces, eth0 and tap0 (the last is an OpenVPN tunnel), and one remote computer connetting through tap0. If I assign a static IP to the remote computer, the bridge works perfecly (so I think the problem is not OpenVPN-related). If I start a DHCPd on the server and I configure the remote client to get the

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

Hello! I am attempting to get tinc running between two machines and would appreciate any guidance one could lend. I have read through all of the documentation and feel that I am close but missing something silly. First Machine: (gerry) $tincd --version tinc version 1.0-cvs (built Jan 17 2002 16:13:13, protocol 11) Copyright (C) 1998-2001 Ivo Timmermans, Guus Sliepen and others. See the

This message was sent to bugtraq today: While playing around with FreeBSD 5.4 and jailing I discovered that it was possible to put an ethernet interface into promiscious mode from within the jailed environment, allowing a packetsniffer to gather data not meant for the jailed box. This also affects FreeBSD 5.3 (tested) but not FreeBSD 4.x This can be reproduced on boxes where BPF support is

Hi all. I would need to use a single physical interface on a Linux box to manage two different IP addresses (belonging to two separate logical subnets) with two different MAC address. (I need to emulate te presence of two separate physical interfaceses for a PC on the same LAN, at layer 2 and layer 3). Is it possible to use the linux ethernet bridging code and two tap interfaces for this

Well, I found a solution and posted it on the appdb's page of Red Alert 3. http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=14371 Here's a copy of the informations I posted on the Red Alert's Appdb webpage : > Thanks to raphael, here's a mini "how to play on LAN to RA3 with Wine + windows users, when the LAN is a VPN" > > My hostname, in

Hi, I hope someone can help me, I cannot seem to get a system's ethernet interface to correctly work in promiscuous mode... I have a Centos 6.4 system with 2 bnx2 interfaces on it. I have set up eth1 in promiscuous mode and am sending traffic to it using the port mirroring configuration on a Nortel 3510-24T switch. The switch reports that it is sending a fair amount of traffic to the

In current Crossbow''s implementation, vlan tag seems to be unconditionally retained for promisc mode listener even when MAC_OPEN_FLAGS_TAG_DISABLE is not specified. I saw comments in mac_rx_deliver() saying that this is deliberately designed like this. I''m wondering why we design it like this (choose not to respect MAC_OPEN_FLAGS_TAG_DISABLE flag for promisc mode listener)? Or

[This email is either empty or too large to be displayed at this time]

On 03/25/09 12:30, James Carlson wrote: > Girish Moodalbail writes: > >> bash-3.2# dladm show-link >> LINK CLASS MTU STATE PROMISC OVER >> e1000g0 phys 1501 up off -- >> e1000g1 phys 1502 up on -- >> > > That (plus or minus some column alignment) seems

Dear Samba-List, i'm new to the list and new to samba. Right now I'm trying setup a samba ADDC serving around 50 Windows 10 clients and a couple of linux clients. My ADDC Host has two NICs, eth0 should be connected to the wan - network, eth1 should be connect to a 10.* network, serving the windows and linux clients. The ADDC is up and running, serving only the 10.* network. I

I've been playing around with qemu and wanted to make the guest OS instance visible on my network. This meant getting bridging and tun/tap working. After getting things working by pasting command from the CentOS wiki article plus adding a few enhancements, I decided to capture the process in a shell script that would be suitable for a user in the sudoers file to fire off. Not sure why

Using a Linux bridge I see that none of the interfaces is set to promiscuous mode but on the other hand I don't see any dev_unicast_xxx calls in the bridge code... for the case of one of the interfaces being a physical NIC (e.g eth1), what's the magic that makes the NIC RX filtering be willing to accept frames whos dest mac isn't the NIC "primary" unicast mac? Also is there

Hello, I've got a very strange problem. Lately I've been setting up my linux servers for network (layer2) redundancy with a bridge interface containing two ethernet interfaces connecting to two switches. So far I didn't have any problems with it, but now a very strange thing happens with a new server I'm installing. The server is an ibm x346 having two onboard BCM5721 cards, the

Hi, I am a beginner of bridge. I have a problem of using Fedora Core 2 to make a simple bridge. Here is my setup: The bridge computer is installed with Fedore Core 2 (with the SE Linux patch). As I know that kernel 2.6.5 is already support bridging by default, so I didn't recompile the kernel. Then I installed bridge-utils-0.9.6-1.i386. And no additional configuration is made. After