From owner-freebsd-net Wed Mar 5 9:58: 0 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E680737B401 for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:57:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from pursued-with.net (adsl-66-125-9-242.dsl.sndg02.pacbell.net [66.125.9.242]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75CFB43FCB for ; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:57:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Kevin_Stevens@pursued-with.net) Received: from pursued-with.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pursued-with.net (8.12.6/8.12.8) with SMTP id h25HvsPg007384; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:57:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Kevin_Stevens@pursued-with.net) Received: from 192.85.47.1 (SquirrelMail authenticated user imap) by new.host.name with HTTP; Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:57:55 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <30622.192.85.47.1.1046887075.squirrel@new.host.name> Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 09:57:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: route pointing to a gateway that's not on net From: "Kevin Stevens" To: In-Reply-To: <200303051416.h25EGaF04635@akiva.homer.att.com> References: <200303051416.h25EGaF04635@akiva.homer.att.com> X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal Cc: Reply-To: Kevin_Stevens@pursued-with.net X-Mailer: SquirrelMail (version 1.2.11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > I was recently following a thread on tech-netbsd that was discussing the > routing tables when the gateway address was on a 10.x.x.x network while > the machine was assigned a 209.122.66.x address. The long and short of > the discussion (as I understand the discussion) was that this was that > while it can be accessed via windose and Linux ( > > > On Linux, we could do this to get around that minor problem: > route add -host 192.168.14.88 dev eth0 > ) that is was an evil, ugy illegal network route and that it not > possible, will not be implemented in NetBSD. It is all of that. ;) I've used this in a network setup where there were multiple local links that terminated at a remote router, and the desire was that traffic be able to flow over any of them. But it leaves a bad taste in my brain, like when Cisco refers to "layer three switching". > Now since my cable ISP has me provised it this manner, and since I can't > find a method to get out from FreeBSD using the route command. I was > wondering if a) I missed something and there is some option for the > route command that allows to route to be setup, or if not will netgraph > allow me to setup this route? I think you do it the same way. Can't you create a route to the 10.x.x.x subnet that simply points to the outbound interface? (rummaging around for network access to router...) Yes, you can use the -interface option with the route command. Try this: route add -net 10.0.0.0 -interface (whatever). Worked for me in at least adding the route, I don't have a ready way to test it at the moment. KeS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message