From owner-freebsd-net  Sat Mar 17 10:44:43 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from filk.iinet.net.au (syncopation-dns.iinet.net.au [203.59.24.29])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CAB0C37B71A
	for <freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sat, 17 Mar 2001 10:44:39 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from julian@elischer.org)
Received: (qmail 26192 invoked by uid 666); 17 Mar 2001 18:45:57 -0000
Received: from i003-071.nv.iinet.net.au (HELO elischer.org) (203.59.3.71)
  by mail.m.iinet.net.au with SMTP; 17 Mar 2001 18:45:57 -0000
Message-ID: <3AB3B069.9EB5D3C7@elischer.org>
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 10:43:53 -0800
From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i386)
X-Accept-Language: en, hu
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Nick Rogness <nick@rogness.net>
Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai <asmodai@wxs.nl>
Subject: Re: same interface Route Cache
References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0103171047250.16998-100000@cody.jharris.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

Nick Rogness wrote:
> 
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2001, Nick Rogness wrote:

> 
> There is no way to tell your packet to go back out to ISP #2.  That is the
> point I'm trying to get across.  Unless your running a routing
> daemon.  But is that really practical with cable modems, dsl, etc?...I
> don't think so.
> 
> >
> >       What if you are running nat in this case....your hosed.
> >
> 
> natd on each interface is what I'm stating here...just to clarify.

I sent out a mesage the other day with a suggestion as to how to this.
(in fact using stateful ipfw rules we could even do better)
did you see it?

> 

-- 
      __--_|\  Julian Elischer
     /       \ julian@elischer.org
    (   OZ    ) World tour 2000-2001
---> X_.---._/  
            v

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message