Danny Kjærgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote :
> I was wondering if route-to and reply-to would help me. I have a box
> with 2 external nic hooked up with 2 dsl lines, with a default gateway
> each, and one internal. On the inside i have aprox 100 users. Can i use
> the route-to and reply-to to split
Ok, let me start over.
What I want to be able to do is share a single IP subnet between two private
network interfaces.
Client 1: ethernet cable. 192.168.1.50 / mask 255.255.255.0
Cleint 2: wireless 192.168.1.60 / mask 255.255.255.0
With a 3-interface OpenBSD firewall in between the two. The f
you just don't get it. It is entirely useless.
EVERYBODY understands that, except for you.
On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 05:49:41PM +0100, Cedric Berger wrote:
> Henning Brauer wrote:
>
> >Obviously, nobody of you has thought through the consequences of collecting
> >the stats on each interface.
> >
>
Henning Brauer wrote:
Obviously, nobody of you has thought through the consequences of collecting
the stats on each interface.
How do you know such a thing?
As I said, I've a patch that did that in the past, for 3.0
or 3.1. So obviously I know something about the
consequences on the code.
However,
* Peter Gorsuch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [08.03.2003 00:01]:
> pass in inet proto { tcp, udp } from any to any port 5899 <> 5911 keep state
> pass out inet proto { tcp, udp } from any to any port 5899 <> 5911 keep
> state
> pass in inet proto { tcp, udp } from any to any port 5799 <> 5811 keep state
> p
Hi, I need to enable ftp in
the following to machines across a PF box doing NAT but cant
get my head around it at all :-(
130.177.x.x 10.25.x.x
public network private
network
Hi
I just saw the webcast from linuxforum 2003 where daniel spoke
about pf. I said something about the route-to as a solution about obsd not
supporting more then one default gateway.
I was wondering if route-to and reply-to would help me. I have
a box with 2 external nic hooked up with 2
Since the tree is already locked for 3.3, this is a post-3.3 issue, so
there's no reason to get agitated over it yet :)
These counters are increased with every packet, and per-packet cost has
the most impact on performance (as compared to per-connection), so this
has to be efficient.
Associating
On Sat, Mar 08, 2003 at 10:07:34PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> but I am definitely taking notes!...about how many interfaces are there in a
> (GENERIC) kernel? I hadn't even though about them.(ruff estimate's ok, a
> specific answer would just be a wasted on me) ~=)
too many. write a short l
