From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 09:21:00 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [Bridge] Trouble with bridged interfaces Message-ID: <20070615092100.5df0c045@localhost> In-Reply-To: <63CB92BFF23FC54A8CF2F4A67654B24601F5D163@i-worx-srv-02.i-worx.ca> References: <63CB92BFF23FC54A8CF2F4A67654B24601F5D163@i-worx-srv-02.i-worx.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Roman Lisagor Cc: bridge@linux-foundation.org On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 18:28:07 -0700 "Roman Lisagor" wrote: > Hi, > > We need to bridge several interfaces together, but still retain the > ability to communicate through the individual interfaces. So for > example, we have eth0 and eth1 bridged and we bind IP addresses to both > of them, in order to inject packets into communication between two > devices connected to our interfaces. > Addresses in Linux aren't assigned to interfaces. Look up the regular questions that come up about Linux responding to ARP on the wrong interface. > It seems that several problems arise intermittently: > > 1. When sending ping requests, replies sometimes come in on eth0/1, but > sometimes on br0. We can work around this, but it would be great to get > some idea of why and when this happens (and possibly whether we can > prevent it from occurring); > > 2. Occasionally, ARP requests sent by external devices for the IPs of > eth0/1 are ignored. > > We are running Fedora Core 6 (2.6.13-15-smp). > Any ideas? > > Thanks in advance for your help. > > Roman Go up your requirements, why do you need to do things this way? There may be better alternatives