Re: Any issues with packet updates?
Bart De Schuymer <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.network.bridge.ebtables.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Monday 21 April 2003 17:03, Scott MacKay wrote:
> Would that cause problems? I thought that packets
> which would not be bridged would simply get dropped
> (since it d should not need to re-introduce it back
> onto the original interface). Currently, my simple
> test is to just pump packets from 1 of the dual homed
> machines to the other and even that seems to have
> problems. My preference is to not introduce it on the
> FORWARD chain because the iptables QUEUE userspace
> module only gets the logical device ('br0'). It is
> nice using pre/post routing because I only get either
> the indev_name or the outdev_name fields filled, so I
> know which direction it is going. When I did try it
> on the FORWARD I got indev & outdev both 'br0'. Not
> too useful....
Well, if you queue all the garbage packets to userspace, that will decrease
performance. Are your iptables rules only queueing specific IP traffic, or
everything?
You can find out the bridge port the packet was received on in the FORWARD
chain. Your queue handler receives the skb, check out the nf_bridge member of
the struct sk_buff.
--
cheers,
Bart
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf