Daniel Baughman <danrb,AT,codenet,DOT,net>|
Fri, 17 Oct 2003 11:08:41 -0600|
So through implication then arp requests won't be passed through the bridge?
And when you say routes to the CIPE you mean that routing will be taking
Network #1 Network#2
* 192.168.1.0/24 * Internet * 192.168.1.0/24 *
* * ______________* *
* * * *
Where the CIPE boxes would sit with the internet connection and perform
bridging functions over the connection so that computers in the same subnet
could communicate wheather they are in network 1 or network 2 without
On Friday 17 October 2003 10:50 am, you wrote:
> It can do this just fine.
> Remote side: create a subnet that routes to the CIPE interface. Make
> sure that this subnet is a block of addresses inside your real network.
> Network side: fix the arp tables to reply to any ip on the remote side
> Route them to the cipe interface.
> If you have a firewall you need to be careful about the CIPE UDP port
> closing. You have to force the firewall to keep the UDP port open or
> create a simple Ping from inside the firewall side from crontab to keep
> the UDP port alive.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Baughman [mailto:danrb,AT,mail,DOT,codenet,DOT,net
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 9:13 AM
> To: cipe-l,AT,inka,DOT,de
> Subject: Question
> Trying to provide a bridge between two remote networks through the
> such that computers on each netowrk could communicate without using a
> and would hear broadcast messages.
> It is my undrestanding that this is possible with CIPE 1.5 and higher,
> CIPE in conjunction with bridge utils.
> anyone done it? had luck at it?
> Daniel Baughman