Steven Jan Springl wrote:
> On Thursday 07 June 2007 00:41, Tom Eastep wrote:
>> Steven Jan Springl wrote:
>>> Tom
>>>
>>> When zones contains:
>>>
>>> fw       firewall
>>> lan      ipv4
>>> tst      ipv4
>>> p1:tst  port
>>> p2:tst  port
>>>
>>> interfaces contains:
>>>
>>> lan  eth0  -  nosmurfs,tcpflags
>>> tst   br0   -  routeback,bridge,optional,tcpflags,rosmurfs
>>> p1   br0:eth1
>>> p2   br0:eth2
>>>
>>> and policy contains:
>>>
>>> fw   all  accept
>>> lan  p2  accept
>>> all   all  drop
>>>
>>> the following iptables rule is created:
>>>
>>> -A lan2p2 -j ACCEPT
>>>
>>> but nothing points to the lan2p2 chain.
>>>
>>> Should it be possible to have a policy from a zone that is not part of a
>>> bridge to a bridge port (line 2 of the policy file above)?
>> I have this covered in one of my earlier experiments but forgot it in
>> the current one. Fixed in r6477.
>>
>> Thanks, Steven
>> -Tom
> Tom
> 
> Should it be possible to have a policy from the bridge to a port on the same 
> bridge e.g. using the above zone and interface definitions:

In principle, such a policy (or rule) is not a problem but I haven't
been able to come up with a good way to detect that case yet.

-Tom
-- 
Tom Eastep    \ Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool
Shoreline,     \ http://shorewall.net
Washington USA  \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP Public Key   \ https://lists.shorewall.net/teastep.pgp.key

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel

Reply via email to