| Hi, |
| |
| If you have still unanswered questions after reading the HOWTO and the |
| FAQ, you have found a bug. Please report bugs to bridge@openrock.net |
| |
| |
| greetings, |
| Lennert Buytenhek |
| |
| |
| |
| Questions that were Asked Frequently enough to get listed here |
| ============================================================== |
| |
| |
| |
| What does a bridge do? |
| ---------------------- |
| A bridge transparently relays traffic between multiple network |
| interfaces. In plain English this means that a bridge connects two |
| or more physical ethernets together to form one bigger (logical) |
| ethernet. |
| |
| |
| Is it protocol independent? |
| --------------------------- |
| Yes. The bridge knows nothing about protocols, it only sees ethernet |
| frames. As such, the bridging functionality is protocol independent, |
| and there should be no trouble relaying IPX, NetBEUI, IP, IPv6, etc. |
| |
| |
| How is this bridging stuff different from a so-called 'switch'? |
| --------------------------------------------------------------- |
| It isn't. |
| |
| |
| Why is your code better than a switch? |
| -------------------------------------- |
| First of all, my code wasn't written with the intent of having linux |
| boxen take over from dedicated networking hardware. Don't see the |
| linux bridging code as a replacement for switches, but rather as an |
| extension of the linux networking capabilities. Just like there are |
| situations where a linux router/dedicated brand router is better |
| than the other, there are situations where a linux bridge/dedicated |
| brand bridge is better than the other. |
| |
| Most of the power of the linux bridging code lies in its |
| flexibility. There is a whole lot of bizarre stuff you can do with |
| linux already (read the 2.4 Advanced Routing document at |
| http://ds9a.nl if you're interested), and the bridging code merely |
| adds some more possibilities for obfuscation into the mix. |
| |
| The most important uses for the linux bridge code I see as follows: |
| - Small bridges (up to 8 ports). |
| - Load sharing a server's traffic over multiple interfaces by |
| connecting sets of clients to different physical network |
| interfaces. |
| - A transparent firewall solution (using the ipchains/iptables |
| firewalling patch). |
| |
| |
| My bridge does not show up in traceroute! |
| ----------------------------------------- |
| It is supposed not to. The operation of a bridge is (supposed to be) |
| fully transparent to the network, the networks that a bridge |
| connects together are actually to be viewed as one big |
| network. That's why the bridge does not show up in traceroute; the |
| packets do not feel like they are crossing a subnet boundary. |
| |
| For more information on this, read a book about TCP/IP networking. |
| |
| |
| Are there plans for MAC address filtering? |
| ------------------------------------------ |
| You should be able to firewall on MAC addresses with the 2.4 |
| firewalling patch. iptables has the ability to filter on MAC |
| addresses, and the firewalling patch should add that capability to |
| the bridging code. I only released the first incarnation of the 2.4 |
| firewalling patch yesterday though, so don't expect this to be |
| stable yet. |