Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:51:28 -0700 From: Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org> To: Nick Rogness <nick@rapidnet.com> Cc: "Marinos J . Yannikos" <mjy@pobox.com>, Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org>, nino@inode.at, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: routing bug(?) persists (PR 16318) Message-ID: <200006151951.MAA00547@mass.osd.bsdi.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 15 Jun 2000 11:40:26 MDT." <Pine.BSF.4.21.0006151057170.66416-100000@rapidnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >My ISP claims that the configuration above works trivially under > >Linux and Windows NT, > > I would like to see that. > > Mr. Smith is correct. Why not set your gateway as the next-hop > address to your ISP upstream within the 195.58.183.77 network? > > Another option would to run an IP tunnel between your network and > the gateway using gif or nos-tun. > > The whole question is, What are you trying to accomplish? I spent some more time thinking about this, and I think the deal is that if you do this on both sides, you achieve the result where you can crosstalk between the two networks without requiring a gateway. It's kinda ugly, but it's basically what route add -iface is there for, and it makes sense that if ARP is happy ARPing for these hosts, the route code should also consider these hosts as directly connected. -- \\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith \\ Tell him he should learn how to fish himself, \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ and he'll hate you for a lifetime. \\ msmith@cdrom.com 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?200006151951.MAA00547>