https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234472
Kristof Provost <k...@freebsd.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|--- |Not A Bug
Status|New |Closed
--- Comment #14 from Kristof Provost <k...@freebsd.org> ---
(In reply to Andreas Pflug from comment #12)
Having thought about this some more I think even more strongly that changing
the behaviour would be wrong.
Multicast is a routable protocol, even if the Ethernet address resolution is
different from unicast traffic. There may also be use cases for the current
behaviour (and route-to *does* do exactly what it's designed and documented to
do).
Moreover, the problem you ran into is specific to Ethernet, so introducing
changes in a layer 3 firewall for the sake of one layer 2 protocol is also the
wrong strategy.
Rodney is also correct that this is a policy question which you can express in
your rules.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
_______________________________________________
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"
