Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:41:53 -0700 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: remodeler <remodeler@alentogroup.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Netgraph question - multiple kernels Message-ID: <4AE78541.50700@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <20091027225454.M12540@alentogroup.org> References: <20091027225454.M12540@alentogroup.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
remodeler wrote: > My understanding is that I can bind multiple machines running netgraph into > one large netgraph, by using something like ng_ksocket nodes bound with a > tunneling device. you COULD do that, yes, but the two netgraphs are unaware of each other. > > By doing this, is the restriction of one ng_ipfw node per netgraph global to > all of the machines (one, and only one, ng_ipfw node)? no it's one per machine > If the ng_ksocket nodes > are connected to ng_bridges on both of the machines, will only relevant > network traffic cross the link - or all network traffic? ng_bridge does MAC address filtering. it only sends no broadcast packets to teh link where it has seen packets coming from that mac address. > Can I configure the > link between the two machines so that I can directly connect a netgraph node > on one machine to a node on the other, or must they communicate by the > bridge-tunnel-tunnel-bridge structure? You are sending the packet out of one netgraph and into another. how you get the packet there is your business.. you could use two ng_ether nodes and use a dedicated ethernet as a low latency tunnel. > > Thank you. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4AE78541.50700>