From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Frost Subject: Re: Doing Bridge with firewalling Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2003 10:10:01 -0500 Sender: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <20030101151001.GS677@ns> References: <001001c2b113$e2181800$0100a8c0@zultys.com> <20021231221901.7569.qmail@web40311.mail.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="RtGa12sjXv8gVUZO" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021231221901.7569.qmail@web40311.mail.yahoo.com> Errors-To: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: To: Kevin McConnell Cc: Ranjeet Shetye , netfilter@lists.netfilter.org --RtGa12sjXv8gVUZO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Kevin McConnell (kevymac@yahoo.com) wrote: > --- Ranjeet Shetye wrote: > > I think that we need to clearly define the > > terminology for Kevin. >=20 > Yes, thank you! :) I am always up for learning new > things. So it was just done at layer 2 instead of > layer 3. I understand now. BUT, back to what the > original poster said. He said that he wanted to have > the bridge do firewalling and NAT'ing (If I read his > post correctly). So according to what is written > below, he can't do that... right?=20 That's what he was claiming but that's incorrect. I've done it and I've helped other people through the process of doing it. The big thing is to get the patch from the bridge homepage (if it hasn't been incorporated into the main kernel yet). Stephen --RtGa12sjXv8gVUZO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+EwTJrzgMPqB3kigRApMdAJ9Q9n3gg0EGrpGNPKoXcx11rFTdugCgmrY4 +D+do1LcpjFvJ985bmlkfbg= =RlvP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --RtGa12sjXv8gVUZO--