[OpenVPN home] [Date Prev] [Date Index] [Date Next]
[OpenVPN mailing lists] [Thread Prev] [Thread Index] [Thread Next]
Google
 
Web openvpn.net

Re: [Openvpn-users] bridging question


  • Subject: Re: [Openvpn-users] bridging question
  • From: Patrick Lesslie <patricklesslie@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 18:48:13 +1000

On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 10:12:03AM +0200, Sttf wrote:
> # Allow packets from TUN/TAP devices.
> iptables -A INPUT -i tun+ -j ACCEPT
> iptables -A FORWARD -i tun+ -j ACCEPT
> iptables -A INPUT -i tap+ -j ACCEPT
> iptables -A FORWARD -i tap+ -j ACCEPT
> 
> # Allow packets from private subnets
> iptables -A INPUT -i br0 -j ACCEPT
> iptables -A FORWARD -i br0 -j ACCEPT
> 
> Why this differentiation? When you add a bridge interface, arent
> you in fact creating a global-unique interface for all the bridged
> ones? If there doesn't remain any IP assigned to any interface, why
> this separate rules? Can you define specific rules for your specific
> bridged interfaces??

You can define specific rules for the tap devices by referring to
them explicitly with -i.  tap+ is shorthand for all interfaces
starting with tap.  It's actually not available in early versions
of iptables, where you would have to do them all separately, or with
a bash for loop or similar.

____________________________________________
Openvpn-users mailing list
Openvpn-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openvpn-users