From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 19 17:19:32 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2F4837B401; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:19:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cactus.fi.uba.ar (cactus.fi.uba.ar [157.92.49.108]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7E5143F3F; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:19:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from fgleiser@cactus.fi.uba.ar) Received: from cactus.fi.uba.ar (cactus.fi.uba.ar [157.92.49.108]) by cactus.fi.uba.ar (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h5K0IlhD075272; Thu, 19 Jun 2003 21:18:47 -0300 (ART) (envelope-from fgleiser@cactus.fi.uba.ar) Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 21:18:47 -0300 (ART) From: Fernando Gleiser To: "Tkachenko, Artem N" In-Reply-To: <573562C6FDA9564A8EEE66D899BC190B02935D91@EMSS01M10.us.lmco.com> Message-ID: <20030619211630.A61487-100000@cactus.fi.uba.ar> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-119.5 required=5.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_IN_WHITELIST version=2.53 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp) cc: "Freebsd-Questions \(E-mail\)" cc: "Freebsd-Config \(E-mail\)" Subject: Re: Networking problem X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 00:19:33 -0000 On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Tkachenko, Artem N wrote: > Hi, > > I posted similar question some time ago but I guess I misstated the problem. > I will be more careful this time. Here is my situation: > > Node A <-----> LAN1 <-----> Node B <-----> LAN2 <-----> Node C Why can't you just set a static route on both Node A and Node C pointing to Node B (each one using it's corresponding IP, Node A points to 129.197.244.10) and enable IP forwarding on Node B? Fer