From owner-freebsd-isp Thu Oct 8 14:18:49 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA22398 for freebsd-isp-outgoing; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:18:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from hp9000.chc-chimes.com (hp9000.chc-chimes.com [206.67.97.84]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA22345 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 14:18:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from billf@chc-chimes.com) Received: from localhost by hp9000.chc-chimes.com with SMTP (1.39.111.2/16.2) id AA275137498; Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:24:58 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1998 13:24:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Bill Fumerola To: Tim Wolfe Cc: "Jeffrey J. Mountin" , freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IP Load balancing In-Reply-To: Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 8 Oct 1998, Tim Wolfe wrote: > Now this particular instance I spent about 5 minutes thinking of so I know > there are tons of holes and/or better ways to do this. The point is, at > Layer3, you get a measure of control over network flow and traffic > structure.. Okay. Essentially, though, you either send using priorities based on MAC addresses or IP addresses. Still, the packet can't get to a machine faster, because the filtering is still the same. I do understand how people would use the cost features, though there are software ways of doing that. - bill fumerola [root/billf]@chc-chimes.com - computer horizons corp - - ph:(800)252.2421 x128 / bfumerol@computerhorizons.com - BF1560 - "Logic, like whiskey, loses its beneficial effect when taken in too large quantities" -Lord Dunsany To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message