From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Aug 6 13:58:28 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id NAA22676 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:58:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from crh.cl.msu.edu (crh.cl.msu.edu [35.8.1.24]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA22659 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 13:58:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from henrich@localhost) by crh.cl.msu.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id QAA02960; Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:58:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 6 Aug 1996 16:58:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Charles Henrich Message-Id: <199608062058.QAA02960@crh.cl.msu.edu> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Intelligent outbound IP source X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 #1 (NOV) Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk The situation, I have a machine that is part of two different networks on the same interface (10.x and a class C), however, as the machine's primary IP address is in the class C, outbound packets always originate on that IP. Would it be too much to say if a packet is destined for a network that I have an alias on, use the first alias as the source IP? This allows machines on both networks to talk cleanly back to the server without having to have routes to both networks on the remote hosts. -Crh Charles Henrich Michigan State University henrich@msu.edu http://pilot.msu.edu/~henrich -- Charles Henrich Michigan State University henrich@msu.edu http://pilot.msu.edu/~henrich