On 27/10/2018 21:02, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
28.10.2018 0:48, Victor Gamov wrote:
On 27/10/2018 19:33, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
27.10.2018 23:26, Victor Gamov wrote:
[skip]
net.link.bridge.pfil_member=1 makes frames enter ruleset as
incoming from bridge member, zero disables this pass.
net.link.bridge.ipfw=1 makes frames enter ruleset again as
incoming from bridge interface itself without distinction of
bridge member, and for forwarded frames enter ruleset one more
time as outgoing from the bridge itself.
And frame enters ruleset one MORE time as outgoing from bridge
member if net.link.bridge.pfil_member=1.
(*)
With current configs I have unexpected behavior when multicast
received via unneeded vlan300 not blocked by rule 9000 and bad
traffic bridged into all bridge members.
So if when net.link.bridge.pfil_member=1 then I can check incoming
and outgoing bridge members as expected? I'll try it later,
thanks
Is it possible the following config with
net.link.bridge.pfil_member=1 ?
Yes, it should be.
table allow239 create type iface table allow239 add vlan400 3000
allow ip from any to 239.0.0.10 recv vlan100 xmit table(allow239)
You also should add the "out" keyword to this rule for performance
and clearness because only outgoing frames have "xmit" attribute to
check, so this rule is not tried for incoming frames (it won't match
them anyway).
It's still very interesting to know full packet path via all
interfaces (phy, vlan, bridge) and understand where/why ipfw
triggered. For example why i need "allow via igb0"? It's because
net.link.ether.ipfw=1? Can you explain it in details?
See above (*).
ok, frame path and ipfw as I see it.
=====
1000 allow ip from any to any via igb0
1002 allow ip from any to any via igb2
1100 deny ip from any to any mac-type 0x0806 via bridge2
1102 allow ip from any to any via bridge2
2000 allow ip from any to 239.0.0.10 in recv vlan200
4000 allow ip from any to 239.0.0.10 out xmit table(allow239)
9000 deny ip from any to any via table(block239)
65000 allow ip from any to any
=====
1. tagged frame come to physical interface igb0.
As I have net.link.ether.ipfw=1 then tagged frame checked by IPFW and I need
1000 allow ip from any to any via igb0
Frame passed via igb0 and untagged.
2. untagged frame appears on vlan100.
Now I can get it via `tcpdump -i vlan100`
Frame checked by IPFW on vlan100 because
net.link.bridge.pfil_member=1 AND vlan100 is a bridge member
( net.link.ether.ipfw=1 is irrelevant? )
So I can pass/block traffic here.
2000 allow ip from any to 239.0.0.10 in recv vlan100
9000 block ip from any to any via table(block239)
Frame accepted on VLAN-100
3. frame (untagged but still ethernet frame not IP packet) appears on bridge2
as incoming and checked by IPFW due net.link.bridge.ipfw=1.
I block ARP but allow all other frames (1100 + 1102)
4. frame appears on all bridge-member vlans.
Frame checked by IPFW on vlan300/vlan400 because
net.link.bridge.pfil_member=1 AND vlan300/vlan400 is a bridge member
So I can pass/block traffic here.
4000 allow ip from any to 239.0.0.10 out xmit table(allow239)
9000 block ip from any to any via table(block239)
Passed frames tagged
5. tagged frame appears on igb2
As I have net.link.ether.ipfw=1 then tagged frame checked by IPFW and I need
1002 allow ip from any to any via igb2
Is this scheme is correct?
Almost right with one exception: bridge considers ARP (and REVARP) packets
special
and passed them through the ruleset only when sysctl net.link.bridge.ipfw_arp=1;
yes it enabled.
Thanks Eugene!
--
CU,
Victor Gamov
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
