[Bridge] Ubuntu: network bridging between wireless and wired connection fails

[richardvoigt at gmail.com]

On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 6:17 AM, Jochen Hebbrecht
<jochenhebbrecht at gmail.com> wrote:
> Nicolas de Pesloüan schreef:
>> bridge-hw and bridge_hw is exactly the same. (No difference between
>> underscore and dash). Both will set a variable $IF_BRIDGE_HW, to be
>> used by the scripts in /etc/network/if-*.d/*.
>>
>> From interfaces(5) : "Additionally, all options given in an interface
>> definition stanza are exported to the environment in upper case with
>> "IF_" prepended and with hyphens converted to underscores and
>> non-alphanumeric characters discarded."
> Ah, ok, thnx!
>>
>> This is unfortunately what I expected.
>>
>> Now, you can have a last try with your current bridge configuration,
>> by upgrading the firmware of your router, ensuring WDS is enabled in
>> the router, and hope that the driver of your wifi adapter support
>> WDS... By the way, what is the type of your wifi adapter ?
> I had a "chat" with somebody of the support site of Linksys. The WRT54GS
> enables WDS. So we can say this is my problem. My wifi adapter is a WMP54G
>>
>> If that fail, I think we have two options :
>>
>> - Try to setup a very special bridge configuration, with some sort of
>> masquerading of the MAC address. This would require at least to use
>> ebtables to replace the source MAC address in the header (and in the
>> payload for ARP) of packets sent on the wifi interface, to route
>> packets in the server, to stop the server from sending ICMP redirect
>> in the wifi interface and to setup a proxy_dhcp on the server. It
>> would be hard to setup, hard to debug and impossible to maintain...
>> Probably not a good idea... Funny to try, but not a good target.
> This really sounds like Chinese in my ears :-D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_ARP

http://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/netfilter/2007-May/068615.html

>>
>> - Setup a simple router configuration on the server, using another
>> private subnet on location B. Using a simple NAT/Masquerading
>> configuration (with iptables), it could be possible to hide the subnet
>> of location B from location A, but still allow access to the printer
>> of location B from location A and access to location A and to Internet
>> from location B. If you don't have a really good reason to stick to
>> bridge (like using a non-IP protocol), I suggest you try this.
> I was thinking on this situation too. But how will be somebody in subnet
> A able to reach someone of subnet B? We are gonna have to change the
> routing tables on the client side too?
>
> Jochen
> _______________________________________________
> Bridge mailing list
> Bridge at lists.linux-foundation.org
> https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge
>