Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 15:23:05 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> To: Evandro Nunes <evandronunes12@gmail.com> Cc: Patrick Tracanelli <eksffa@freebsdbrasil.com.br>, "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Mahnaz Talebi <mhnz.talebi@gmail.com> Subject: Re: netmap-ipfw on em0 em1 Message-ID: <CA%2BhQ2%2Bivy2XaddtQMQ=fr5CHt4_cnejt%2BjFZHTcGkyQ8zS25gw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAG4HiT7_3p2f=XLqzr0DYyRsL2R8S0opXKkBHAPH%2B9c8kcw_Jg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CABfVBTktfLGacJ3PerR%2BgTewbS%2B52Vmno9mcT-XQBNktPFw5%2Bw@mail.gmail.com> <CAG4HiT7qery5wEevFUS2bb=91tyF77ZmTdZL0WUi3APCcCYT4Q@mail.gmail.com> <9C799778-79DC-4D5F-BA5C-EA94A573ED10@freebsdbrasil.com.br> <CAG4HiT4UK2tyj%2B0ggjNAfY35oG=zHPW5%2BKXtCyUBn-vPPpCWhg@mail.gmail.com> <CAG4HiT7_3p2f=XLqzr0DYyRsL2R8S0opXKkBHAPH%2B9c8kcw_Jg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Evandro Nunes <evandronunes12@gmail.com> wrote: > professor luigi > > where can I find the code for netmap-fwd you mentioned on usenix paper? > > =E2=80=8Bthat has been renamed to bridge.c cheers luigi =E2=80=8B > > ** https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc12/atc12-final186.pd= f > > On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Evandro Nunes <evandronunes12@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> hello again patrick >> >> On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Patrick Tracanelli < >> eksffa@freebsdbrasil.com.br> wrote: >> >>> > (Machine-A)<-->Machine-B<--->(MachineC) >>> > >>> > Machine-A: >>> > em0 172.16.251.3/24 >>> > >>> > Machine-B: >>> > em1: 172.16.251.1/24 >>> > em2: 172.16.252.1/24 >>> > 10.0-STABLE w/ latest netmap-ipfw and netmap code from google code >>> > repository >>> > >>> > Machine-C: >>> > em0 172.16.252.3/24 >>> >>> Now, your scenario is a typical routing topology. kipfw has no packet >>> forwarding capabilities whats why when you start it, you are out of >>> forwarding capabilities and therefore, out of communication between mac= hine >>> A and C because they just need it in your topology. >>> >>> So for your testing purposes read again what Mahaza said: >>> >>> >> ipfw works as a bridge and copy >>> >> incoming packets to em0 to em1 if they pass defined rules (and vice >>> versa, >>> >> from em1 to em0). >>> >>> Got it? kipfw will work as a BRIDGE and COPY between the NIC ports. >>> >>> Therefore on your topology do a simple change: >>> >>> Machine-C: >>> ifconfig em0 172.16.251.4/24 >>> >>> So machine C will be in the same network of machine A. >>> >>> WITHOUT kipfw you will be OUT of communication. If you want to have >>> communication without kipfw please configure if_bridge(4) properly. >>> >>> Now WHEN you ./kipfw netmap:em1 netmap:em2 you will BRIDGE em1 and em2 >>> ports and therefore you will HAVE communication between the NICS. >>> >>> And you are done, just as a miracle! Thanks to Luigi. >>> >> >> YES IT WORKED YES >> thank you VERY MUCH for the kind help and for making it clear all the >> stuff I missed reading, yes I assume I should have read more or at least >> understood >> now I can see how the things works and it does work >> >> THANK YOU again very much >> >> >> >>> Now its time to have some fun: >>> >>> ipfw/ipfw add pipe 1 all from 172.16.251.0/24 to 172.16.251.0/24 >>> ipfw/ipfw <http://172.16.251.0/24ipfw/ipfw>; pipe 1 config bw 128Kbit/s >>> delay 300 >>> >>> and now ping machine-A and machine-C and see dummynet working as >>> expected... >>> >>> I believe you can keep on with your testings now!!! :-) >>> >> >> yes it worked as well >> >> now let me ask you all, other than click, does netmap offers something >> that can do packet forwarding? simple packet forwarding like the scenari= o I >> was trying before? I know this is not kipfw and not bridge but is there >> something? >> >> thank you >> >> >> >>> BTW Luigi, I see netmap was commited to GENERIC on -CURRENT. I believe >>> it may be a good idea to add netmap-ipfw to the base system now, to bot= h >>> promote more testing and also to be a good companion to netmap on GENER= IC. >>> I dont mean a new ipfw-netmap binary under /sbin/ but just the code on >>> /usr/src/tools/tools. >>> >> >> yes and some handbook or a better README that at least mentions the >> correct syntax for the tools >> I think adrian chadd mentioned something about that in an earlier messag= e >> >> >>> >>> I've been using netmap-ipfw for a while and sure it lacks more >>> flexbility like the ability to kipfw several ports, etc. But as it is r= ight >>> now, it's very stable and reliable for a preliminary code. Thats why I >>> believe it should be on the base system. Thank you very much for the >>> incredible technology. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > --=20 -----------------------------------------+------------------------------- Prof. Luigi RIZZO, rizzo@iet.unipi.it . Dip. di Ing. dell'Informazione http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ . Universita` di Pisa TEL +39-050-2211611 . via Diotisalvi 2 Mobile +39-338-6809875 . 56122 PISA (Italy) -----------------------------------------+-------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2BhQ2%2Bivy2XaddtQMQ=fr5CHt4_cnejt%2BjFZHTcGkyQ8zS25gw>