Date: Sat, 26 Apr 1997 00:26:17 -0400 (EDT) From: Steve <shovey@buffnet.net> To: spork <spork@super-g.com> Cc: Bill Grunfelder <wjgrun@cyberwar.com>, freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SMTP gateway clients Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.95.970426002428.3446Q-100000@buffnet11.buffnet.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95.970425202937.13574A-100000@super-g.inch.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, spork wrote: > I remember we hacked it with two by having one default through the > other... It worked, but the one acting as the gateway for the other was > not very happy... > > Please post your solution, as Annexes amuse me to no end. They are such > evil little boxes. I've also heard (not a routing expert) that RIP v2 > updates on any change, which would solve the problem assuming the Annex > can do v2... They do rip2, but it doesnt apparently work. One person sent me a possible solution. Using 1 class C for the annex ethernet cards, and the static IPs so that the ethernet cards would proxy arp them. Then another class C for the dynamic ones assigned to modems, then static routes in ones cisco to assist the world in finding the non-statics. I think I will tell the 1 or 2 people who want smtp to buy uucp or hike. > > Charles > > On Fri, 25 Apr 1997, Bill Grunfelder wrote: > > > How many RA4000s do you have? I have a solution (albeit an ugly one, but it > > works) if you've only got 2 of them, and a cisco router (not sure if it will > > work with others). > > > > > > Bill > > ....................................................................... > > Bill Grunfelder System Administrator > > wjgrun@cyberwar.com Cyber Warrior, Inc. > > http://www.cyberwar.com/~wjgrun/ (201) 703-1517 > > > > -The above does not necessarily coincide with the views of my employer- > > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSI.3.95.970426002428.3446Q-100000>