From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 12 00:06:07 2004 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 9A7FC16A4CE for ; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:06:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from ns2.alphaque.com (ns2.alphaque.com [202.75.47.153]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0251D43D5D for ; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 00:06:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dinesh@alphaque.com) Received: (qmail 67336 invoked by uid 0); 12 Jan 2004 08:05:59 -0000 Received: from lucifer.net-gw.com (HELO prophet.alphaque.com) (202.75.47.153) by lucifer.net-gw.com with SMTP; 12 Jan 2004 08:05:59 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.alphaque.com [127.0.0.1]) by prophet.alphaque.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i0C4M7ac036148; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:22:07 +0800 (MYT) (envelope-from dinesh@alphaque.com) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 12:22:07 +0800 (MYT) From: Dinesh Nair To: David Miller In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20040112120129.L336-100000@prophet.alphaque.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: routing to specific network 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: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:06:07 -0000 On Sun, 11 Jan 2004, David Miller wrote: > So you want packets for 60.6.* to go out through ISP2? it is amazing that how something which completely stumps you at 4am, suddenly becomes so clear after some sleep and coffee at 11am. i added a route for 60.6/16, but was trying to traceroute 61.6/16. the mistake kept perpetuating because i kept using the shell's history to run the traceroute, and the mind could not tell the difference between the 0 and the 1. my bad, and much apologies. all works fine now. > Zebra implemets a number of routing protocols, including bgp. With BGP > you can pick the best route *out* for your packet, but everyone else's > BGP sessions will decide the best route *in* for you. In other words, to me, if i can pick the source ip address of my _outgoing_ packet, i.e. on which interface the connection is made, i'd be a happy camper. since i have two interfaces with two ip addies, the first http connection can have a 192.168.0/24 ip address, with the flow being carried on fxp0. the second http connection have have a 10.1/16 address with the flow being carried on the aue0. that would actually solve the problem, without having to set up multiple static routes. would this be possible ? thanx a bunch, david. Regards, /\_/\ "All dogs go to heaven." dinesh@alphaque.com (0 0) http://www.alphaque.com/ +==========================----oOO--(_)--OOo----==========================+ | for a in past present future; do | | for b in clients employers associates relatives neighbours pets; do | | echo "The opinions here in no way reflect the opinions of my $a $b." | | done; done | +=========================================================================+