Re: How to route
> > Good idea! But is it a Good Thing? mhhh... yes, it seems!
> > Ok, as a definitive solution I'll do it and update to
> You definitly don't have to update to iptables and 2.4 kernels
> to NAT.
Yes, but in the future...
> > By the way, I have to patch the kernel 2.2.17 (or 18 or 19)
> > to do bridging, isnt'it?
> You don't have to patch your kernel, however, if you didn't compiled
> it yourself, enabling bridging, nat (and so on) modules needed, you
> must recompile your kernel. For the moment, i don't use kernel-package
> and kernel-sources-<version> to compile and install my kernel(s), but
> it may (must ;-) be a good solution to begin (and to end ...).
Last mounth I enabled bridge within a 2.2.19 (tar.gz) kernel and there was
no 'bridge' chain in ipchains. The chain appared magically applying a
linux_brfw_2.2.17.diff to the kernel and recompiling it...
pheraphs I was wrong and that was not the point, I don't remember.
> Last thing, i'm wondering why you need bridging ? I presume you are
> making a mismatch between NAT and Ethernet-Bridging, which are significantly
> different ...
Well... a bridge is a /---\ on a river beetwen two networks... it has a
learning algoritm to know who can traverse it. Howto said.
A Nat is a way to redirect a packet to or from somewhere...
They can both solve my problem, but pheraps Nat was designed for me.
When I say Nat i mean "iptables nat" because is the only Nat I know under
linux. Yes, what I'm going to do with a bridge could be seen as a Nat.
Oooooo.
And why I need bridging...? because I don't want to modify the router as
my old good poor manager asked to me...!
But he isn't crazy: he want a "portable" security sistem for similar
networks he manage.
> You should take a look to kernel docs and read a little
> about bridging
I hope understanding it well! :)
Bye, Marco
Marco Tassinari +039 328 1187801
mailto:iw3hja@dei.unipd.it
http://www.taffi.it
Reply to: