Re: per-interface default routes?

2007-03-15 Thread dex
On 3/14/07, Alexandre Biancalana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/14/07, Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yes. but ipfw is most universal having all needed things at one place. firewalling, routing, shaping, etc. PF too. is all at same place. And pf has nat built-in, so it runs in

per-interface default routes?

2007-03-14 Thread Mark Messier
. That is, I want per-interface default routes (is this the correct term?). How do I do this? Thanks, -mark ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL

Re: per-interface default routes?

2007-03-14 Thread Wojciech Puchar
and packets sourced from the netB IP address go out the netB physical interface. That is, I want per-interface default routes (is this the correct term?). How do I do this? using ipfw rule example: add xxx fwd router_for_a_link all from outgoing_address/range to any please learn at least

Re: per-interface default routes?

2007-03-14 Thread youshi10
address go out the netB physical interface. That is, I want per-interface default routes (is this the correct term?). How do I do this? Thanks, -mark Route has more information if you want to setup default routes for interfaces. Either that, or natd will yield a solution for you. -Garrett

Re: per-interface default routes?

2007-03-14 Thread Wojciech Puchar
That is, I want per-interface default routes (is this the correct term?). How do I do this? Thanks, -mark Route has more information if you want to setup default routes for interfaces. Either that, or natd will yield a solution for you. natd needs IPFW and is quite CPU consuming compared

Re: per-interface default routes?

2007-03-14 Thread Mark Messier
Route has more information if you want to setup default routes for interfaces. I'm familiar with route(8)... but I don't see how that will work. Can you expand on your comment? I'm likely to do the ipfw approach suggested by Wojceich, as soon as I rebuild with options IPFIREWALL_FORWARD,

Re: per-interface default routes?

2007-03-14 Thread Alexandre Biancalana
On 3/14/07, Mark Messier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Route has more information if you want to setup default routes for interfaces. I'm familiar with route(8)... but I don't see how that will work. Can you expand on your comment? I'm likely to do the ipfw approach suggested by Wojceich, as

Re: per-interface default routes?

2007-03-14 Thread Wojciech Puchar
interfaces. I'm familiar with route(8)... but I don't see how that will work. Can you expand on your comment? I'm likely to do the ipfw approach suggested by Wojceich, as soon as I rebuild with options IPFIREWALL_FORWARD, exactly, sorry i forgot to mention about that option.

Re: per-interface default routes?

2007-03-14 Thread Wojciech Puchar
I'm likely to do the ipfw approach suggested by Wojceich, as soon as I rebuild with options IPFIREWALL_FORWARD, This could be done with pf route-to too. yes. but ipfw is most universal having all needed things at one place. firewalling, routing, shaping, etc.

Re: per-interface default routes?

2007-03-14 Thread Alexandre Biancalana
On 3/14/07, Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm likely to do the ipfw approach suggested by Wojceich, as soon as I rebuild with options IPFIREWALL_FORWARD, This could be done with pf route-to too. yes. but ipfw is most universal having all needed things at one place.