Quoting Danial Thom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > --- Ted Mittelstaedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > >-----Original Message----- > > >From: Danial Thom > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >Sent: Monday, December 26, 2005 7:50 AM > > >To: Ted Mittelstaedt; Winelfred G. Pasamba > > >Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > > >Subject: RE: FreeBSD router two DSL > > connections > > > > > > > > > > > >As stated, even by Ted, you have to register > > ALL > > >of your addresses with ALL of your ISPs, so > > you > > >can send your packets to ANYONE you want, even > > if > > >they are filtering. > > > > > > > No, what I said is that any ISP that is an > > end-node AS > > and gets a feed from a network must tell that > > network > > what IP blocks they are using to send traffic > > from. > > > > You're a very sick person, Ted. If you use BGP, > both of your providers have to "know" about all > of your address blocks.
My VERY FIRST response to the original poster was that their scheme would not work UNLESS they were running BGP. > So if they "know" about > your address blocks, then you can load balance > instead of using BGP. Its the same damn thing, > you incompetent blob :) > > There's little point in being multi-homed if you > can't send all of your traffic up EITHER pipe. If > you couldn't, you'd be out of business if one of > your pipes was down,which simply isn't the case. > > I really don't know what's wrong with you, except > that you seem obsessed with being on the opposite > side of whatever arguement I'm one. You're making > a goddamned fool of yourself. > I think you are arguing with a series of straw men. Perhaps you might try READING THE RESPONSES for a change? Ted _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
