Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 19:39:23 +0200 From: Terje Elde <terje@elde.net> To: Per olof Ljungmark <peo@intersonic.se> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: jail network configuration Message-ID: <FE61DE1D-1888-433A-A516-09B211EB178C@elde.net> In-Reply-To: <55B7AD6B.8060608@intersonic.se> References: <55B7AD6B.8060608@intersonic.se>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 28. juli 2015, at 18:27, Per olof Ljungmark <peo@intersonic.se> wrote: > Is the following scenario possible (same network number): >=20 > Host IP x.y.z.1/24 on physical port 1 > Host IP x.y.z.2/32 on physical port 2 > Jail IP x.y.z.3/32 on physical port 2 Like Eichorn said, it's possible to configure things like that, but there mi= ght be some surprising results with regards to routing, and traffic flowing f= rom your host. Whenever I see a question like this though, I wonder what you're actually tr= ying to do. If you don't mind, it'd be interesting to hear about which probl= em you're trying to solve by configuring it like this. There's a good chance= there could be a better way to solve things.=20 If it's about load-balancing for example, then (dependig on switch etc), it c= ould be a better idea to make a bundle out of the two interfaces, sharing th= eir bandwidth.=20 Terje
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?FE61DE1D-1888-433A-A516-09B211EB178C>