Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 4 Aug 2002 01:22:14 +0000
From:      Philip Reynolds <philip.reynolds@rfc-networks.ie>
To:        freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: "ipfw fwd" not working without static route?
Message-ID:  <20020804012214.B1711@rfc-networks.ie>
In-Reply-To: <web-45259@novaconnect.net>; from mailing@novaconnect.net on Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 09:53:28AM -0400
References:  <20020801231035.B31318@rfc-networks.ie> <web-45259@novaconnect.net>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
Matt Abraham <mailing@novaconnect.net> 87 lines of wisdom included:
> I think in my case, a better scenario would be that I still
> want to have the meeting point in building A for everyone
> EXCEPT those from say, the Purchasing department; those
> indiviuals should go over to building B. 

OK, however there is currently no route from A to B, so noone can
get through.

> Now the use of static routes become problematic because the
> route now only applies to packets that match a certain
> criteria, namely having a source address of 172.17.1.5. If I
> modify the netmasks on the box (and not use ipfw fwd), I
> change the behaviour for all packets coming through...not
> what I want to do.

I still think you can do what do you want to do by using subnetting
your network properly. 

Crist did suggest an alternative with a ``dummy'' route. Perhaps
more details (including interfaces, IP addresses, network addresses,
subnets etc.) would allow us to look at the actual design of the
network (which is where I feel the flaw is).

-- 
Philip Reynolds                  | Technical Director
philip.reynolds@rfc-networks.ie  | RFC Networks Ltd.
http://www.rfc-networks.ie       | +353 (0)1 8832063

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ipfw" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020804012214.B1711>