Actually, an HTTP reply has a clearly defined source address. It came from a connected TCP socket which by definition has both a source address/port and a destination address/port. You can do the same with UDP, although the notion of a "reply" is somewhat less clearly defined there.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ed Brown Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 4:25 PM To: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5 (Tikanga) discussion mailing-list Subject: Re: [rhelv5-list] problem with multiple interfaces not a router Tom Sightler wrote: > So I've added a rule, with a higher priority than the main rule, which > says, if the source IP address 120.207.9.13, you should use route table > #1, not the main route table, to determine the outbound interface and > gateway. Everything else continues to fall to the main route table. With all due respect, this is crazy talk. ;-) It's circular logic, or something. When a dns reply (or http reply, or echo reply, etc) is queued for delivery, it does not HAVE a source address. By the time it gets associated with 120.207.9.13, by the time it gets to the physical interface, it's on it's way out, it has already been routed. I'm sorry, you talk a good line, but I believe you're constantly blurring the distinction between routers and multi-homed servers. (I am however, taking my bib home with me.) > Some very good references: > > http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.html > http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.rpdb.multiple-links.html These references are totally about routers, just as you defined them, devices that move packets from one interface to another. They have NO bearing on this 'multiple interfaces, not a router' discussion. -Ed _______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list _______________________________________________ rhelv5-list mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-list
