From owner-freebsd-i386@freebsd.org Mon Sep 5 11:57:55 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-i386@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A028AB78026 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2016 11:57:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90536176 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2016 11:57:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id u85Bvt9R000406 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2016 11:57:55 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-i386@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 212331] pfil processing order Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2016 11:57:55 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 10.3-STABLE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: srijan.nandi@gmail.com X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-i386@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: I386-specific issues for FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2016 11:57:55 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D212331 --- Comment #4 from srijannandi --- With route-to, I can have a multi gateway rule. This multi-gateway acts for load balancing or failover. So, in case a gateway fails, the connections wi= ll be handled by the active gateway. Or else, it would load balance traffic us= ing the route-to rule. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=