From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 22 21:02:19 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 688011065670 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 21:02:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lasse@bitmand.com) Received: from mail-ew0-f54.google.com (mail-ew0-f54.google.com [209.85.215.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0408F8FC23 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 21:02:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy22 with SMTP id 22so340848ewy.13 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 14:02:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.213.106.7 with SMTP id v7mr1271143ebo.31.1285189335733; Wed, 22 Sep 2010 14:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.13.37.105] (1905ds1-taa.0.fullrate.dk [90.184.133.165]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id z55sm15394137eeh.15.2010.09.22.14.02.13 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 22 Sep 2010 14:02:14 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081) From: Lasse Brandt In-Reply-To: <6BE964C4-0838-4DA6-9278-12C620CA1EE1@bitmand.com> Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 23:02:12 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <6BE964C4-0838-4DA6-9278-12C620CA1EE1@bitmand.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1081) Subject: Re: Default gateway on different net X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 21:02:19 -0000 Hi again, Just wanted to update on the problem, in case someone stumbles upon this = in the archives - original mail: = http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2010-September/026481.html On 21. Sep 2010, at 12:37 , Lasse Brandt wrote: > 2) Should the default route really be the last route to be added in = /etc/network.subr:1057? (not sure if there is a reason to why its first = - but I feel guilty messing with that file directly :) ) I am still wondering about this. I found another post in the archives = going way back that asks the same question, but no really answer. In my = case it's important that the static routes are created before the = default route. Anyone know if there is a reason for the default to be first? > 3) Am I setting this up in a completely wrong way? > ( At this point it feels like "everything is right, but I miss _that_ = fundamental option/config somewhere ) Well, I was, after creating my static and default route, the only = missing part was: ndp -I re0 There is a more in-depth explanation on the matter here: http://social.bitmand.com/post/1168584251/hetzner-freebsd-and-ipv6 Best regards, Lasse Brandt