Thanks for replying, Daniel
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 08:07, Tom Jobbins wrote:
This can be demonstrated from the command line with the following:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~]$ ifconfig tun0 1.2.3.5 1.2.3.250
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~]$ ifconfig tun1 1.2.4.4 1.2.3.250
ifconfig: ioctl (SIOCAIFADDR): File exists
This is really odd, because I don't see this on my machines (as per our
discussion on IRC which you mention below), I did..
midget# uname -a
FreeBSD midget.dons.net.au 5.4-STABLE FreeBSD 5.4-STABLE #4: Mon Aug 1
09:01:42 CST 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/sys/i386/compile/MIDGET i386
midget# cat /dev/tun &
[1] 21524
midget# cat /dev/tun &
[2] 21525
I've isolated the difference. If I repeat exactly what you do -
including the two cat /dev/tun commands - then it works for me too. So
long as the tun0 and tun1 interfaces are created with a cat /dev/tun &,
I am able to give them matching remote gateway addresses.
However this is not the case when the interfaces are created any other
way, i.e. via ppp. Ditto ng0/ng1 created by mpd.
Also, if I then kill the cat /dev/tun commands, leaving tun0 and tun1
existing, but unopened, I am then no longer able to set the matching
gateway. And if I don't kill the cat commands, ppp can't use those tun
devices because another process has them open.
So it would appear this was just a dead end. I don't know whats
different about an interface created with the cat command - perhaps as
it's not connected to a real network utility, the normal route checking
does not apply?
If you - or anyone else - has any more ideas as to what I can try to
make this work, I would be most grateful. It's incredibly frustrating
to be limited in this way, given that I'm almost certain that ipfilters
source-based routing will get around any routing issues if I could only
bring the interfaces up.
Thanks
Tom
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
