On Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 10:34 PM, DLStrout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So let's see if I am getting this .... > > If the "intermediate router" sees the "destination > address" as part of its "connected network" then > it passes the packet to the destination directly. > Then the destination host sees its "default > gateway" as the pfSense box and passes the return > traffic to it and lets it route accordingly ... > I'm assuming that's what you mean by asymmetric > routing. >
yes > So if I dedicate interfaces on the pfSense boxes > to the "intermediate" router then that takes all > the reflective routing capabilities away right? > Your asymmetric routing goes away if the router is off a different interface on pfSense from the clients. As far as I know, "reflective routing" is a term you made up (google it - your threads using it are the first 5 hits), so I won't comment on that. :) > I understand that asymmetric routing is NOT a best > practice - nor the preferred method, but in some > cases I'd think it is appropriate, but I do see > what you mean. I didn't say it was bad, it's unavoidable a lot of the time. You just can't statefully filter traffic in that scenario. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Commercial support available - https://portal.pfsense.org
