Hi Terry, Any reason why you have proxy ARP enabled? I don't think you will want the bridge to be answering any ARP requests other than to its own address/es (do you?) Also, I'm not certain what is the effect of point-to-point mode on bridge port, but I can't imagine that you would need to force it in these cases. Since you highlighted both attributes, I suspect that you have some focus on them already - can you add any comment on why you have selected them? Cheers Mike.
-----Original Message----- From: Public [mailto:public-bounces@talk.mikrotik.com.au] On Behalf Of Terry Sweetser Sent: Wednesday, 22 April 2015 8:22 AM To: public@talk.mikrotik.com.au Subject: [MT-AU Public] L3 over QinQ and a Bridge -- too far?
Hello Mikrotikians,
I've been looking at this one for a while now.
I have several hundred QinQ vlans heading into a single bridge group.
ipv4 and ipv6 from the bridge interface into the individual links is working well.
None of the ipv4 addresses can actually connect to or ping each other.
Flags: X - disabled, R - running 0 R name="bridge136" mtu=auto actual-mtu=1500 l2mtu=1992 *arp=proxy-arp* mac-address=D4:CA:6D:01:38:C7 protocol-mode=none priority=0x8000 auto-mac=yes admin-mac=00:00:00:00:00:00 max-message-age=20s forward-delay=15s transmit-hold-count=6 ageing-time=5m
Flags: X - disabled, I - inactive, D - dynamic 0 interface=XXXXXX bridge=bridge136 priority=0x80 path-cost=10 edge=auto *point-to-point=yes* external-fdb=auto horizon=1 auto- isolate=no
A bridge too far?
_So, I'm looking for solution where the IPv* arrives at bridge136 and then goes straight back out the correct port.__ _ -- http://about.me/terry.sweetser
_______________________________________________ Public mailing list Public@talk.mikrotik.com.au http://talk.mikrotik.com.au/mailman/listinfo/public_talk.mikrotik.com.au