Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 24 Apr 2011 20:50:53 -0400
From:      David Scheidt <dscheidt@panix.com>
To:        Lionel Fourquaux <lionel.fourquaux+freebsd-questions@normalesup.org>
Cc:        FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: routing to a directly attached subnet without an address in this subnet
Message-ID:  <9DC435EF-B1BA-405D-9023-9724F65E77E3@panix.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110424202954.GA16373@phare.normalesup.org>
References:  <20110424202954.GA16373@phare.normalesup.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Apr 24, 2011, at 4:29 PM, Lionel Fourquaux wrote:

> Dear FreeBSD users,
>=20
> Consider an IPv6 router with two interfaces, e.g. em0 and em1.
> em0 has addresses fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abc and 2001:db8::1
> em1 has address fe80::1234:56ff:fe78:9abd
> Network 2001:db8::/64 is directly attached to em0, and network =
2001:db8:0:1::/64 is directly attached to em1. The default route points =
to em0. I would like to route packets addressed to 2001:db8:0:1::/64 to =
interface em1, without allocating an address in 2001:db8:0:1::/64 for =
em1. (Or to understand why this would be impossible).
>=20

Why do you want to do this?  How do you expect the hosts on the attached =
networks to get packets to you? =20




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9DC435EF-B1BA-405D-9023-9724F65E77E3>