Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 28 Apr 1998 13:50:34 +0300
From:      Eugene Vedistchev <scaner@belabm.by>
To:        David Muir Sharnoff <muir@idiom.com>
Cc:        "freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG" <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: Routing problem that I need solved.
Message-ID:  <3545B47A.5AABF3AC@belabm.by>
References:  <199804280755.AAA11300@idiom.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello 

Have you seen IP-Filter ?
check http://cheops.anu.edu.au/~avalon/
and http://cheops.anu.edu.au/~avalon/examples.html#redirection

David Muir Sharnoff wrote:
> 
> My fellow FreeBSD addicts, I've got a kernel mod that I need done.
> I could probably do it myself, but I would much prefer not to as
> I've got other fish to fry.  I've also got slightly more money than
> time.  I can afford to $2,000 as a thank-you if someone does this.
> 
> Idiom is now multi-homed.   Idiom has three sets of IP addresses:
>         1:  addresses that can only be routed through BEST.COM
>         2:  addresses that can only be routed through ABOVE.NET
>         3:  addresses that can be routed through either BEST.COM or ABOVE.NET
> 
> Most addresses are type 3 (routed through both).  For reliability,
> it's important to keep a few key services using type 1 and type 2
> addresses.  For example, the two primary nameservers: ns.idiom.com
> uses a type 1 address and ns2.idiom.com uses a type 2 address.
> 
> That provides some reliability for the incomming traffic.  What I
> would like is to make sure that at least some of the outgoing traffic
> is symmetrical.
> 
> If a packet is coming _from_ a type 1 address, then it should be
> routed out through BEST.COM.  If it's coming from a type 2 address then it
> should be routed out through ABOVE.NET.
> 
> I run OSPF internally, so the routing situation tends to be a bit
> dynamic.
> 
> As many utilities as possible should reply using the address they were
> contacted on.  DNS, radius, etc.  That's a separate problem though.
> 
> My solution to this would be to create another ipfw rule: "route through"
> 
> Example of usage:
> 
>         # skip over packets that are inbound.
> 
>         ipfw add 100 skipto 200 all from any to 140.174.82/24 # type 1
>         ipfw add 110 skipto 200 all from any to 209.66.121/24 # type 2
>         ipfw add 120 skipto 200 all from any to 209.157.64/19 # type 3
> 
>         # selectively route type 1 and type 2 outbound
> 
>         ipfw add 140 pass through 140.174.37.21 all from 140.174.82/24 to any
>         ipfw add 150 pass through 209.66.121.1 all from 209.66.121/24 to any
> 
> The semantics of "pass through" are that the next hop for the packet
> will be chosen as if it were bound for the address given.  The same rule
> can be deployed throughout my network.
> 
> There's one other detail that would help things: make the skipto rule fast.
> Right now the skipto rule does a linear search.
> 
> I know that $2k is not much money for tricky kernel work, but it's
> what I can afford for this.  Cisco routers can do routing based on
> the source address.
> 
> I use -STABLE.  I need a solution that's fit for production use and
> also fit for inclusion in -STABLE.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -Dave
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3545B47A.5AABF3AC>