It sound to me what he needs/wants is something called load ballanceing. Ive never setup load balancing, but Ive heard of it being used with modems. for a while atleast linux was the only way to do load balancing, I read about it many years ago, it is basicly using multiple modems, dialup internet accounts, phone lines, connected to one computer. so... lets say you have 2 modems, phonelines, internet accounts. You can have both modems dialup the internet and connect. Then you surf or whatever and get the full bandwitdh of both modems (ie 2 x 33.6k modem = 67.2k). I dont know how to do it, but I also dont see any reason you cannot do it.
Jamie On Wednesday 30 January 2002 21:09, you wrote: > On Wednesday 30 January 2002 19:04, Jacob Meuser wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 05:43:07PM -0800, Mark Bigler wrote: > > > I'd sure think that pf would do > > > all they want and more. > > > > > > > > We have a box that acts as our uber router that will have a > > > > > wireless nic, wired nic, nic for the dsl, and nic for the > > > > > cable. It will be doing nat/firewall and dhcp. Thats about it. > > > > > Is there anyway to tell > > > > > the machine to send all packets on ports 21 and 80 through the > > > > > cable and everything else through the DSL? > > > > You mean like this? > > > > cable dsl > > ports \ / all other > > 21,80 router ports > > > > net > > > > I don't think it's possible with pf. The kernel would have to > > route by port to route the packet through the right NIC. > > > > That's not what NAT does. It changes the source and/or destination > > IP address. Sure, it can do this selectively by port, but that's > > not the same thing. > > You're right. My mistake. I was thinking the packet filter might be > able to "route" packets using the port field. > > > It may be possible with NAT and ALTQ combined, but I haven't looked > > much at what ALTQ is capable of. > > > > These types of ideas come up with some frequency on the > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ml -> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-misc
