From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Nov 12 08:45:53 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB59616A4CE for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 08:45:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from blacklamb.mykitchentable.net (207-173-254-228.bras01.elk.ca.frontiernet.net [207.173.254.228]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E143F43FF9 for ; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 08:45:52 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from drew@mykitchentable.net) Received: from l035522 (unknown [165.107.42.110]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by blacklamb.mykitchentable.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41DFF3BF39E; Wed, 12 Nov 2003 08:45:51 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <017901c3a93c$6ec7b6e0$6e2a6ba5@lc.ca.gov> From: "Drew Tomlinson" To: "Helge Oldach" , "Lars Eggert" , <"."@babolo.ru>, "Aaron Burke" , "Joshua Sahala" , "Lowell Gilbert" References: <022501c3a491$e46bf780$6e2a6ba5@lc.ca.gov> Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 08:45:50 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Routing With Two ISPs? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:45:54 -0000 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Drew Tomlinson" Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2003 10:14 AM > I have a 4.8 box serving as a gateway with two connections to the > Internet. Is there some way to set the box up so that packets are > routed out through the same interface from which they arrived? For > example, if a connection is initiated on port 80 from a packet arriving > on one interface, is there a way to make the outgoing packets from my > web server use that same interface as a gateway instead of the default > interface? > > Any suggestions appreciated. Thank you to all that responded. Because of my unique situation that requires NAT to be run on the Linksys AP/router, and it's limitation of only forwarding to IP addresses in it's own subnet, I'm not sure if I will be able to accomplish my goal. However, I will try the suggestions and post my results over the next few weeks. I just wanted to acknowledge all that responded and say "thank you". Drew