From owner-freebsd-isp Tue Nov 19 17:15:39 1996 Return-Path: owner-isp Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA21266 for isp-outgoing; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 17:15:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from red.jnx.com (red.jnx.com [208.197.169.254]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA21249 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 17:15:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from chimp.jnx.com (chimp.jnx.com [208.197.169.246]) by red.jnx.com (8.8.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id RAA20814; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 17:15:02 -0800 (PST) Received: (from tli@localhost) by chimp.jnx.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id RAA16629; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 17:14:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 17:14:52 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199611200114.RAA16629@chimp.jnx.com> From: Tony Li To: dan@dpcsys.com CC: isp@freebsd.org In-reply-to: (message from Dan Busarow on Tue, 19 Nov 1996 16:57:52 -0800 (PST)) Subject: Re: changed to: Frac T3? Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk If you are running a web server, and maybe sendmail and popper, on this box it's probably not a real* router. I bet it'll have a default route out the serial interface and a static route pointing at the interior network. If this is the case, should a P133 have any problems, even under heavy load? I don't see how the choice between two routes would get in its way. * it's not going to be running gated or even routed Well, obviously the static routes won't fall out if the box is overloaded. So for that case, no problem. Of course, as you say, it's not a Real Router (tm) ;-) Tony