From owner-freebsd-chat  Sat Apr 20 10:44:14 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org
Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [12.23.109.2])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FF0037B405
	for <chat@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sat, 20 Apr 2002 10:44:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mustang.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp0.lariat.org@lariat.org [12.23.109.2])
	by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA20044;
	Sat, 20 Apr 2002 11:44:06 -0600 (MDT)
X-message-flag: Warning! Use of Microsoft Outlook may make your system susceptible to Internet worms.
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20020420113621.021dfd00@nospam.lariat.org>
X-Sender: brett@nospam.lariat.org
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 11:44:01 -0600
To: "Matthew D. Fuller" <fullermd@over-yonder.net>
From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>
Subject: Re: How to control address used by INADDR_ANY?
Cc: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG
In-Reply-To: <20020420122212.A27415@over-yonder.net>
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20020420111258.021d7270@nospam.lariat.org>
 <4.3.2.7.2.20020419144005.0358c610@nospam.lariat.org>
 <4.3.2.7.2.20020419144005.0358c610@nospam.lariat.org>
 <4.3.2.7.2.20020420004621.02379880@nospam.lariat.org>
 <3CC1245C.EEE4ADE@mindspring.com>
 <4.3.2.7.2.20020420111258.021d7270@nospam.lariat.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-chat.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-chat>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-chat>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

At 11:22 AM 4/20/2002, Matthew D. Fuller wrote:

>The same routable address you have on its internal interface, with a /32
>netmask, and then the default route pointed out the interface.

I'd considered this, but wasn't sure about the effects of having
an address assigned to two interfaces simultaneously. How would
this affect responses to ARP queries?

Other options I've considered are:

1) Using natd to change the souce addresses on outgoing packets
with a source addresses in 10.x to something routable (that is,
having the machine do NAT for its own internal processes). Would
this work? 

2) Running local processes in a "jail" (assuming that this would
force their IP source addresses to the address assigned to the
"jail...." Would it? I'd need to figure out how to configure this,
because the natd documentation doesn't really explain how it works).

--Brett


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