Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 12:36:06 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@cell.sick.ru> To: Mark Nipper <nipsy@tamu.edu> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: ported NetBSD if_bridge Message-ID: <20040417083606.GE46266@cell.sick.ru> In-Reply-To: <20040417081741.GA87909@ops.tamu.edu> References: <20040417074543.GB77469@ops.tamu.edu> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0404170052480.66312-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <20040417081741.GA87909@ops.tamu.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 17, 2004 at 03:17:42AM -0500, Mark Nipper wrote: M> Which, incidentally, was why I chose OpenBSD over FreeBSD M> for the Snort box/firewall I was working on. The bridge M> manipulations made perfect sense the first time I looked at them M> and PF did everything it could normally do (including the M> redirects to localhost), even over a bridged interface. I even M> ended up in a debate with a die hard FreeBSD'er who was mumbling M> about whipping up some code to provide similar functionality with M> ng. And I was like great, then go code it! I'll just start M> implementing this other solution now which already works and M> required no coding on my part, which admittedly, is not my strong M> suit. Needless to say, I was finished first. You can play with ng_etf/ng_tee/ng_socket/ng_ksocket to inject traffic from bridge into userland towards snort. Just sit some time thinking of netgraph nodes and you'll find solution. -- Totus tuus, Glebius. GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040417083606.GE46266>