[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  Fred Wright <fw at well dot com>
 To:  m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
 Subject:  RE: [m0n0wall] Three offices and three Private Circuits!
 Date:  Sun, 13 Feb 2005 19:48:11 -0800 (PST) 
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, Brian Mills wrote:

> I have a cunning plan to assign the network ports for the LAN extensions
> such that:
>  
> (at site 1)
>  
> LAN 89.0.4.5/24
> WAN (not used)
> OPT1 10.0.0.1/24
> OPT2 bridge to OPT1
>  
> then to connect OPT1 to the link to site 2, OPT2 to the link to site 3
>  
> (site 2) 
>  
> LAN 90.0.4.5/24
> WAN (setup for my ISP)
> OPT1 10.0.0.2/24
> OPT2 bridget to OPT1
>  
> connect OPT1 to the link to site1, OPT2 to the link to site 3
>  
> (site 3)
>  
> LAN 91.0.4.5/24
> WAN (not used)
> OPT1 10.0.0.3
> OPT2 bridge to OPT1
>  
> connect OPT1 to the link to site 1, OPT2 to the link to site 2
>  
> Then with correct static routes and firewall entries COULD it work?!? Or
> will everything turn into a big feedback loop and die horribly?

From the bridge(4) manpage:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Care must be taken not to construct loops in the bridge topology.  The
kernel supports only a primitive form of loop detection, by disabling some
interfaces when a loop is detected.  No support for a daemon running the
spanning tree algorithm is currently provided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

					Fred Wright