On Jan 22, 2019 1:49 PM, Greg Troxel <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jörn Clausen <[email protected]> writes: > > > I am trying to use a Raspberry Pi running > > > > NetBSD armv7 8.99.30 NetBSD 8.99.30 (RPI2) > > > > as a bridge to extend my WiFi net to some devices. I have two NICs, > > usmsc0 (internal RJ45) and urtwn0 (WiFi USB). urtwn0 is up and running > > and works as desired. I have followed the bridge instructions in the > > NetBSD guides, i.e. > > > > $ cat /etc/ifconfig.bridge0 > > create > > !brconfig $int add urtwn0 add usmsc0 up > > That is probably ok, but note that the interfaces each have to be up, > and generally you would have one configured with an address and one not. > I have done this on a box with two wired ethernets. It generally works, > but there is some wierdness with ND6 in terms of getting replies on the > secondary (no-addr) interface with the mac addr of the primary > interface. > > You didn't mention what you are doing about urtwn0 and config. If you > are using it in hostap mode and using a different ssid, then that sounds > plausible. I am unclear on what happens if the same ssid. > > > tcpdump on either interface shows that broadcast packages are passed > > between interfaces, but nothing else. A DHCP request coming in via > > usmsc0 from a device is visible on urtwn0 but is not passed on to my > > DHCP server. > > Defintely run 'brconfig bridge0' and look at the output. In particular > you should see an "address cache" section, showing which mac addrs have > been learned as on each side. > > To support bridging, an interface has to do PROMISC mode in hardware, so > that incoming packets with not-us unicast mac addresses are received. > The cache will help in understanding how that is working. > > > I have > > > > net.inet.ip.forwarding = 1 > > > > and because it sounded helpful also > > > > net.inet.ip.subnetsarelocal = 0 > > > > but no change. > > Your box is not intending to do ip forwarding. So that's irrelevant, > and I would undo that setting, not because it's harmful, but because > it's non-standard and not helpful, and simpler is better. > > > Any ideas? Is the Raspi kernel missing something that makes it > > unusable as a bridge? > > If 'brconfig bridge0' looks ok, it has "pseudo-device bridge". > > > Feel free to send me 'ifconfig' and 'brconfig bridge0' offlist (as > unwrapped text/plain :-).
You may want to look into dhcrelay(8).
