From owner-freebsd-net Sat Mar 17 12: 7:32 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from spider.pilosoft.com (p55-222.acedsl.com [160.79.55.222]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1E5237B718 for ; Sat, 17 Mar 2001 12:07:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from alex@pilosoft.com) Received: from localhost (alexmail@localhost) by spider.pilosoft.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA26624; Sat, 17 Mar 2001 15:12:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 15:12:17 -0500 (EST) From: Alex Pilosov To: Garrett Wollman Cc: Nick Rogness , freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: same interface Route Cache In-Reply-To: <200103171937.OAA75388@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Garrett Wollman wrote: > That's the way Internet routing is supposed to work. If your routing > table says a packet supposed to go one way, and it really needs to go > another way, that's *user error* -- if you misconfigure your routing, > FreeBSD will do what you ask it to; it can't read your mind! There are legitimate reasons why you may want more flexibility than simple destination-based routing. I.E. Having two connections, one satellite (fast cheap but high-latency) and one long-distance modem connection (slow, expensive but low-latency) and dynamically routing telnet packets over the modem connection. Or, traffic engineering: routing packets from a certain blocks over a certain interface, etc. -alex To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message