Page 1 of 1
[ask] bridging rule
Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2007 7:03 pm
by larmaid
any tutorial about bridging rule.....???
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:07 pm
by larmaid
weks.......anyone
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 1:46 pm
by sergejs
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:31 pm
by larmaid
wew finally....well i already read the bridge manual but that dont result anything........in bridge-filter does it same as firewall for bridging..??
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:40 pm
by sergejs
Bridge firewall implements filtering for data from to or trough bridge.
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:06 pm
by larmaid
is that mean the same as firewall in ip-firewall...??
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:08 pm
by sergejs
Yes.
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:20 pm
by larmaid
well i try a simple rule in bridge-filter but it didnt work...??
the rule is like this :
interface: in interface-lan1
out interface-lan2
IP : src.address-192.168.10.0/24
dst.address-10.10.15.0/24
Action : drop
lan1 & lan2 is in the same bridge
Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 6:34 pm
by larmaid
can anyone help...pliss
Posted: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:41 am
by sergejs
Could you provide complete rule or export from 'interface bridge fiter' ?
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 6:02 am
by larmaid
interface-bridge-filter>add chain=forward in-interface=lan1 out-interface=lan2 src.address=192.168.10.0/24 dst.address=10.10.15.0/24 action=drop
note :
i got 4 ether and i bridge all
when i apply the rule the 192.168.10.0/24 still can connect to 10.10.15.0/24.....????
is something wrong with my rule.....if so please help......thx
Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 6:20 am
by larmaid
hello.....need help pliss
Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 8:30 pm
by sten
to filter traffic going *through* your bridge (going from one interface to another) you need to add rules to "forward" chain.
The input/output chains are reserved for traffic going *TO* or *FROM* your bridge, as in winbox and routed traffic.
Posted: Mon Jan 29, 2007 6:24 pm
by larmaid
@sten can i delete the bridge (that connected all the ether) and set all the 4 ether with specified ip....with the same subnet..and i want all the 4 ether are connected?? i've try this one but all the 4 ether cannt connected!!!
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 12:58 am
by sten
what's your configuration?
and what do you want to achieve?
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 5:43 am
by sky_16
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:57 pm
by larmaid
okay heres my configuration that i want to achive:
ether 1 - with ip = 10.10.1.1/255.255.0.0 (local) (reply only)
ether 2 - with ip = 10.10.2.1/255.255.0.0 (local)
ether 3 - with ip = 10.10.3.1/255.255.0.0 (local)
ether 4 - with ip = 202.165.x.x (global)
what i want to is all ether can connect each other without to creat a bridge.....!!!!!
thx
Posted: Tue Jan 30, 2007 7:33 pm
by tneumann
ether 1 - with ip = 10.10.1.1/255.255.0.0 (local) (reply only)
ether 2 - with ip = 10.10.2.1/255.255.0.0 (local)
ether 3 - with ip = 10.10.3.1/255.255.0.0 (local)
Address overlap... they're all 10.10/16
what i want to is all ether can connect each other without to creat a bridge.....!!!!!
Well, if you do not create a bridge, then you'd have to route... but you can't because your network address ranges overlap. Sounds like you're stuck and need to rethink your network design.
--Tom
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 1:43 am
by larmaid
so that means i need to bridge, right??
Posted: Wed Jan 31, 2007 8:28 pm
by sten
no
you have a fundamental flaw in your design
you need to apply correct subnet masks.
hint: correct subnet masks for the subnetting you chose is 255.255.255.0 but you need to find out how this affects your routing tables.
Posted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:43 pm
by larmaid
i need to change my subnet for each ether......
Posted: Mon Feb 05, 2007 3:06 pm
by sky_16
larmaid...it's ur job to re-design the network