Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 8 Sep 2011 12:20:06 -0400
From:      "Rob V" <rob@ipninja.net>
To:        "'Daniel Hartmeier'" <daniel@benzedrine.cx>, "'Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav'" <des@des.no>
Cc:        freebsd-pf@freebsd.org
Subject:   RE: route-to rule
Message-ID:  <000601cc6e43$33c78640$9b5692c0$@net>
In-Reply-To: <20110908141026.GB10185@insomnia.benzedrine.cx>
References:  <868vpzqjz2.fsf@ds4.des.no> <20110908141026.GB10185@insomnia.benzedrine.cx>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> I realize that pf can't *know* the correct next-hop address for the
>> specified interface, but it can make a reasonable guess (first non-zero
>> address in $ext2:network), so hard-coding would only be required in
>> cases where the "reasonable guess" is incorrect or $ext2 has multiple IP
>> addresses.
>
> There is no guessing involved. If you specify the addresses, this
> address is used for an arp lookup, and the ethernet frame will have
> this IP address' MAC address as destination.
>
> If you don't specify the address, the destination IP address of the
> matching packet is used for the arp lookup instead!
>
> If that destination IP address is not local (i.e. must be sent through
> a next-hop), you MUST specify the next-hop address, or the packet will
> be dropped, as arp resolution will fail.


Unless your router is doing proxy arp.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?000601cc6e43$33c78640$9b5692c0$>