Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2001 10:48:17 -0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Alex Pilosov <alex@acecape.com> Cc: Nick Rogness <nick@rogness.net>, freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG, Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai <asmodai@wxs.nl> Subject: Re: same interface Route Cache Message-ID: <3AB3B171.C89A0177@elischer.org> References: <Pine.BSO.4.10.10103171216120.8329-100000@spider.pilosoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alex Pilosov 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. > <flame> > Is the clue really gone from this list? > </flame> > > > > With policy routing, you indeed will be able to multihome, without any > cooperation of your upstream (assuming strict filters on their ingress > interfaces) and have things work. it should be possible to use IPFW and natd to do this: IPFW could use Luigi's probability feature to select an interface to use for each initiating session and ipfw could use a stateful rule to 'remember the choice made' The final step is to select to which divert rule the packets eventually get sent. Each divert rule goes to a different natd, each of which is attached to a different outgoing interface. > > -- > -- > Alex Pilosov | http://www.acecape.com/dsl > CTO - Acecape, Inc. | AceDSL:The best ADSL in Bell Atlantic area > 325 W 38 St. Suite 1005 | (Stealth Marketing Works! :) > New York, NY 10018 | > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message -- __--_|\ 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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3AB3B171.C89A0177>