Re: [PATCH] brouted packet identified as PACKET_OTHERHOST blocked by higher protocol

[Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>]

Yigal Reiss (yreiss) <yreiss@cisco.com> wrote:
> > No, thats not the problem you're trying to solve.
> > 
> > If you want to move OTHERHOST skbs, don't (b)route them?
> > 
> > Whats the real issue that you're trying to solve?
> 
> I want to (b)route them because I want to be able to inspect the packets in higher levels
> (through iptables or user space IPS).

For nfqueue via iptables, use call-iptables sysctl?

Alternatively, implement NFQUEUE support for NF_BRIDGE family,
we'll need this eventually for nftables bridge family anyway.

AF_PACKET should just 'work' without brouting.

> Once I do that (i.e. (b)route by applying an appropriate ebtables rule), the corresponding
> packets get dropped unless I apply the patch.

Maybe, but if you broute everything you might as well just remove the
bridge...

You can use -j redirect in ebtables broute table to force local MAC dnat (this also
'fixes' the pkttype to _HOST) if you really want to broute.