From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pascal Hambourg Subject: Re: Problem with new --physdev-out style Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:46:48 +0200 Message-ID: <471F1488.3000200@plouf.fr.eu.org> References: <20071024071854.GA18581@volker-sauer.de> <471EF68A.702@trash.net> <471F00DC.9070001@snapgear.com> <471F03B1.3090909@trash.net> <471F0597.4030203@plouf.fr.eu.org> <471F0D18.1030606@snapgear.com> <471F0ED1.202@plouf.fr.eu.org> <471F12DC.8050508@snapgear.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE To: netfilter@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: In-Reply-To: <471F12DC.8050508@snapgear.com> Sender: netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Philip Craig a =E9crit : > Pascal Hambourg wrote: >=20 >>Sure, but what about packets that enter a bridged interface and then = are=20 >>routed ? >=20 > It's not set for them either, they are still just routed packets. > Not sure I understand your question. My original comment was that > because the packets are routed (even though they arrived on a bridge)= , > the bridged flag is not set, and so the --physdev-is-bridged option > would never match for that particular rule, and it simply isn't > possible to fix that rule to get the --physdev-out to work. I misunderstood your original comment. I thought you meant that=20 --physdev-is-bridged would not help distinguish between routed and=20 bridged packets when the input and output interfaces are bridges. Thank= s=20 for taking the time to clarify.