Hello everyone!
I'm very enthusiastic about this new bridge concept in 15.0, so I've put it to use of my old configuration where I had a dedicated bridge for every cloned VLAN interface.
But it doesn't seem to work the way I expected.
In particular, this is part of my old config:
Here, tap1 is used by a VM guest with IP set by the guest OS 192.168.0.3/24 (no VLAN ID set on it!!).
So this is "VLAN 10" then, because of igb0.10.
And to connect to it from LAN I use, say, em0.10 on a remote LAN host, with IP address set to, say, 192.168.0.7/24.
This works fine, the old way.
But when I try to use the NEW bridge approach, I don't seem to be able to connect to VLAN 10!!!
As documented, I go like this:
This is a recommended way to do it: instead of creating igb1.10 I'm using bridge0.10.
I want thus to connect tap1 with igb1 on VLAN 10 and then be able to connect LAN hosts to that VLAN on igb1.
The problems is, I can't connect to VLAN 10 from a remote host, whatever notation I use on that host, old or new.
Whether I use em0.10 or bridge0.10 + "ifconfig bridge0 vlanfilter addm em0 tagged 10"
The only thing that seems to work this way is, when I use VLAN 10 on tap1 inside my VM, then I can connect to VM using IP 192.168.0.3/24 -- but only on localhost!!
I'll repeat it: if I use VLAN 10 on that "tagged 10" interface tap1 inside the VM guest (it happens to be OpenBSD, I use vlan0 device with "vnetid 10" on it), then I get connectivity to that VM through VLAN 10 -- but only on localhost.
So, my question is: how am I supposed to connect to that from LAN?
Now in the old style the word "tagged/untagged" isn't present at all. In the new one it is.
But how does that effect the concept of VLANs?
I'm very enthusiastic about this new bridge concept in 15.0, so I've put it to use of my old configuration where I had a dedicated bridge for every cloned VLAN interface.
But it doesn't seem to work the way I expected.
In particular, this is part of my old config:
Code:
ifconfig bridge0 addm igb1.10 addm tap1
ifconfig bridge0 inet 192.168.0.1/27
So this is "VLAN 10" then, because of igb0.10.
And to connect to it from LAN I use, say, em0.10 on a remote LAN host, with IP address set to, say, 192.168.0.7/24.
This works fine, the old way.
But when I try to use the NEW bridge approach, I don't seem to be able to connect to VLAN 10!!!
As documented, I go like this:
Code:
ifconfig bridge0 vlanfilter addm igb1 tagged 10 \
ifconfig bridge0 addm tap1 tagged 10
ifconfig bridge0.10 inet 192.168.0.1/24
I want thus to connect tap1 with igb1 on VLAN 10 and then be able to connect LAN hosts to that VLAN on igb1.
The problems is, I can't connect to VLAN 10 from a remote host, whatever notation I use on that host, old or new.
Whether I use em0.10 or bridge0.10 + "ifconfig bridge0 vlanfilter addm em0 tagged 10"
The only thing that seems to work this way is, when I use VLAN 10 on tap1 inside my VM, then I can connect to VM using IP 192.168.0.3/24 -- but only on localhost!!
I'll repeat it: if I use VLAN 10 on that "tagged 10" interface tap1 inside the VM guest (it happens to be OpenBSD, I use vlan0 device with "vnetid 10" on it), then I get connectivity to that VM through VLAN 10 -- but only on localhost.
So, my question is: how am I supposed to connect to that from LAN?
Now in the old style the word "tagged/untagged" isn't present at all. In the new one it is.
But how does that effect the concept of VLANs?