http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550049
http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550049#c26
Marius Tomaschewski
Also I don't believe that the ieee is stupid enough to devise a rule for wireless NICs that excludes them from usage in a bridge configuration also devised by that committee. A bridge is, by definition, transparent, so addressing shouldn't get into it's way.
It seems, it was not clear enough. It was about MAC / hardware addresses, not about IP addresses. Yes, a bridge (IEEE 802.1D) is transparent to protocols above the MAC layer. It works at the data link layer 2 and forwards (ethernet) frames a sender (port), to each another (port), except to the sender itself and uses hardware addresses (MAC) to control this flow and avoid loops. This also means, that bridges are not concerned with the above layer and are e.g. unable to distinguish between networks (as routers, that work at IP / network layer 3). As I already told, this is not a problem of a bridge per se. The WLAN interface used in the bridge does not forward the frames it gets from bridge, because it discards anything that has a different _MAC_ than the WLAN interface -- in this special case, the frames from your NAS, that come via the the ethernet interface. The bridging of wireless requires WDS. Without WDS, wireless to ethernet bridging works with some wireless drivers, that support a different sender and source address. I found two links about, that resolve this bug: http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/networking/bridge#It_d... http://www.linuxfoundation.org/collaborate/workgroups/networking/bridge#I_st... -- Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.