From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Aug 6 19:45:34 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECF0537B401 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 19:45:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chimera.noanet.net (chimera.noanet.net [66.119.192.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3022743F75 for ; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 19:45:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mksmith@noanet.net) Received: from MKSSONY ([64.146.175.64]) by chimera.noanet.net (8.12.9/8.12.9) with SMTP id h772jOwb080577; Wed, 6 Aug 2003 19:45:24 -0700 (PDT) From: "Michael K. Smith" To: , "'Kenneth Culver'" Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2003 19:45:27 -0700 Message-ID: <004001c35c8d$f64fb9b0$40af9240@MKSSONY> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <1147.66.63.97.2.1060198261.squirrel@bmyster.com> cc: 'FreeBSD Questions' Subject: RE: Question concerning dual-NIC configuration X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2003 02:45:35 -0000 why would ya want to route lo1 127.0.0.1 to a 192.x.x. address ??? seems to me that there are to many system side processes that listen or ocmmunicate thru that...giving access or routing that traffic to a internal address ...doesnt seem to smart to me. --=20 I wouldn't; I was using that as an example. I would want to create a second, separate loopback interface, much in the same way you can do on = a Cisco and then route traffic across both interfaces to the loopback. = All of the addresses would be valid. Mike