Packets sent by guests on virbrN, *or* by dnsmasq on the same, to
- 255.255.255.255/32 (netmask-independent local network broadcast
address), or to
- 224.0.0.0/24 (local subnetwork multicast range)
are never forwarded, hence it is not necessary to masquerade them.
In fact we must not masquerade them: translating their source addresses or
source ports (where applicable) may confuse receivers on virbrN.
One example is the DHCP client in OVMF (= UEFI firmware for virtual
machines):
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.bios.tianocore.devel/1506/focus=2640
It expects DHCP replies to arrive from remote source port 67. Even though
dnsmasq conforms to that, the destination address (255.255.255.255) and
the source address (eg. 192.168.122.1) in the reply allow the UDP
masquerading rule to match, which rewrites the source port to or above
1024. This prevents the DHCP client in OVMF from accepting the packet.
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709418
Signed-off-by: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
* Move platform specific things (e.g. firewalling and route
collision checks) into bridge_driver_platform
* Create two platform specific implementations:
- bridge_driver_linux: Linux implementation using iptables,
it's actually the code moved from bridge_driver.c
- bridge_driver_nop: dumb implementation that does nothing
Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>
