Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:06:30 -0500
From:      Albert Chin-A-Young <china@thewrittenword.com>
To:        Nick Rogness <nick@rapidnet.com>
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Routing help
Message-ID:  <20000726160630.A6599@postal.thewrittenword.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007261426190.34597-100000@rapidnet.com>; from nick@rapidnet.com on Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 02:43:30PM -0600
References:  <20000726013652.B8690@postal.thewrittenword.com> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007261426190.34597-100000@rapidnet.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 02:43:30PM -0600, Nick Rogness wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Albert Chin-A-Young wrote:
> > I have a FreeBSD/x86 3.4 box configured with two NICs, both connected
> > to separate networks. I have one default route. How would I do the
> > following:
> >   1. Respond to all packets coming from NIC #1 through NIC #1 and
> >      respond to all packages coming from NIC #2 through NIC #2.
> >      Because I have a default route, all packages return through
> >      only one NIC.
> 
> 	Return from where?  Are the hosts on the networks connected
> 	pointed at the FreeBSD as the default gateway? 
> 
> 	I'm not quite clear on what you mean but I would recommend some
> 	type of Interior routing protocol, like RIP or OSPF to handle
> 	your routing needs.  Static routes can be a pain to manage after a
> 	while.

Say the FreeBSD box is a web server and gets a connection from host
foo on the 'net. This connection comes in over NIC #1. When the
BSD box wishes to communicate back with this host, I want the traffic
to go back through NIC #1, regardless of what the default route says.

> >   2. If NIC #1 goes down and the default route is set to NIC #1,
> >      no packets can go through on NIC #2 (only for that subnet).
> >      Is it possible to add a second default route so when the
> >      network on NIC #1 goes down packets are sent through
> >      NIC #2 (this disturbs connections already on NIC #1 but
> >      that's OK).
> > 
> 
> 	This discussion has come up before.  You can't
> 	(yet) add the same route to a netblock that is already in the
> 	routing table.

Yet as it's being worked on?

Thanks.

-- 
albert chin (china@thewrittenword.com)


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000726160630.A6599>