Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 17:13:53 -0800 From: Jon Simola <jsimola@gmail.com> To: Matt MacDonald <macdonald.matthew@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Two interface route-to problem Message-ID: <8eea0408050207171355d8e2d9@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <8878e3ce05020716141bc822c4@mail.gmail.com> References: <8878e3ce05020704156c54f315@mail.gmail.com> <8eea0408050207104056b5f37d@mail.gmail.com> <8878e3ce05020716141bc822c4@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 19:14:35 -0500, Matt MacDonald <macdonald.matthew@gmail.com> wrote: > I was sure that I read in the docs somewhere that you could use > route-to on an outgoing packet as well. If not, is there any way that > I can route a packet back out tun1 when my default route is tun0? I've only ever done it on inbound packets, ala: pass in on em1 reply-to (em1 x.x.252.1) proto tcp to em1 port smtp keep state In that case, for an inbound SMTP I run from a secondary low-priority connection. (Read: cheap multihoming, we've got an OC3 and use a cheap business cable drop as a secondary network for DNS and SMTP) If you're running PF on a router, this should be easy because packets have to enter via some interface. I've never had to do this for connections originating on the PF machine. Perhaps tweaking the route table would help do what you're looking for: route add net 192.168 gateway 172.16.100.1
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8eea0408050207171355d8e2d9>