Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:06:19 -0500
From:      James Snow <snow@teardrop.org>
To:        freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: ARP, bridging, and ipfw
Message-ID:  <20010212170619.A38568@teardrop.org>
In-Reply-To: <20010212161340.A38417@teardrop.org>; from snow@teardrop.org on Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 04:13:50PM -0500
References:  <20010212161340.A38417@teardrop.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
After poking around in the FreeBSD mailing list archives for long
enough, I found the answer to my own question.

Quoting from:

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=45862+48717+/usr/local/www/db/text/2001/freebsd-stable/20010211.freebsd-stable

Robert N. M. Watson wrote:

> There used to be a kludge that mapped the ether_header.  ether_type 
> field of non-IP packets into the UDP port number for the purposes of 
> certain IPFW rules when bridging.  This was pretty awful.  :-)  That 
> kludge was removed, and the BRIDGE code now simply forwards all non-
> IP packets, including ARP, and does not pass them through IPFW when 
> IPFW is enabled, making them follow the equivilent of a default pass 
> rule.  This is a kludge that I am glad to see go: I can certainly 
> imagine the desire to support non-IP filtering in a bridge, but IPFW 
> was not the right vehicle for that.  

I'm inclined to agree. No reason for *IP* firewall to do non-IP
filtering. :)

But, continuing my theme of playing the inquisitive idiot, are there
tools that will do filtering of non-IP traffic in a bridging FreeBSD
box?


-James

On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 04:13:50PM -0500, James Snow wrote:
> 
> I'm experimenting with using a FreeBSD box as a transparent firewall.
> Looking at /etc/rc.firewall, I see:
> 
> # If you're using 'options BRIDGE', uncomment the following line to pass ARP
> #${fwcmd} add 300 pass udp from 0.0.0.0 2054 to 0.0.0.0
> 
> I found it curious that I'd had no problems with ARP before adding that
> line to the rules I'm using, and that even after adding it as the first
> rule in the list, it never matches, even after I flush my local ARP
> cache and force some ARP requests.
> 
> Are these lines in /etc/rc.firewall deprecated? Do ARP packets get
> excetped from the ipfw rules now or something?
> 
> Also, what on earth does ARP have to do with UDP sourced from port 2054?
> 
> 
> Just curious,
> -James
> 
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010212170619.A38568>