From owner-freebsd-isp Sun Jul 25 22:26:35 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from snafu.adept.org (adsl-63-193-112-19.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.193.112.19]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F05E115290; Sun, 25 Jul 1999 22:26:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mike@snafu.adept.org) Received: from localhost (mike@localhost) by snafu.adept.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA25298; Sun, 25 Jul 1999 22:23:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 22:23:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Mike Hoskins To: "Francis Percival C. Favoreal" Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: divert In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 26 Jul 1999, Francis Percival C. Favoreal wrote: > What I had in mind is two networks coexisting in one physical network. Like a dummynet tunnel within a public network? Hmm... never done/seen anything like this - what would be the advantages? It's not any more 'robust' (if a NIC fails, a host still has no other entrance). It's not particularly secure (the public network allows outside access to each host). Perhaps you would encrypt the dummynet tunnel for some sort of internal, private communication? Mike Hoskins mike@adept.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message