From owner-freebsd-net Wed Jul 26 14: 7:12 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.thewrittenword.com (pipe.thewrittenword.com [216.80.59.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3019237BEB6 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:07:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from china@thewrittenword.com) Received: (from china@localhost) by mx1.thewrittenword.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA29906; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:06:30 -0500 (CDT) From: Albert Chin-A-Young Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:06:30 -0500 To: Nick Rogness Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Routing help Message-ID: <20000726160630.A6599@postal.thewrittenword.com> References: <20000726013652.B8690@postal.thewrittenword.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.1.12i In-Reply-To: ; from nick@rapidnet.com on Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 02:43:30PM -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Jul 26, 2000 at 02:43:30PM -0600, Nick Rogness wrote: > On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Albert Chin-A-Young wrote: > > I have a FreeBSD/x86 3.4 box configured with two NICs, both connected > > to separate networks. I have one default route. How would I do the > > following: > > 1. Respond to all packets coming from NIC #1 through NIC #1 and > > respond to all packages coming from NIC #2 through NIC #2. > > Because I have a default route, all packages return through > > only one NIC. > > Return from where? Are the hosts on the networks connected > pointed at the FreeBSD as the default gateway? > > I'm not quite clear on what you mean but I would recommend some > type of Interior routing protocol, like RIP or OSPF to handle > your routing needs. Static routes can be a pain to manage after a > while. Say the FreeBSD box is a web server and gets a connection from host foo on the 'net. This connection comes in over NIC #1. When the BSD box wishes to communicate back with this host, I want the traffic to go back through NIC #1, regardless of what the default route says. > > 2. If NIC #1 goes down and the default route is set to NIC #1, > > no packets can go through on NIC #2 (only for that subnet). > > Is it possible to add a second default route so when the > > network on NIC #1 goes down packets are sent through > > NIC #2 (this disturbs connections already on NIC #1 but > > that's OK). > > > > This discussion has come up before. You can't > (yet) add the same route to a netblock that is already in the > routing table. Yet as it's being worked on? Thanks. -- albert chin (china@thewrittenword.com) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message