From owner-freebsd-multimedia Wed Feb 28 12:41:38 1996 Return-Path: owner-multimedia Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id MAA10113 for multimedia-outgoing; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 12:41:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from silver.sms.fi (root@silver.sms.fi [194.111.122.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA10105 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 12:41:35 -0800 (PST) Received: (from pete@localhost) by silver.sms.fi (8.6.12/8.6.9) id WAA10252; Wed, 28 Feb 1996 22:40:58 +0200 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 22:40:58 +0200 Message-Id: <199602282040.WAA10252@silver.sms.fi> From: Petri Helenius To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: Mark Tinguely , multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Seeking advice on mrouted configuration.. In-Reply-To: <2917.825535313@time.cdrom.com> References: <199602281653.KAA13471@plains.nodak.edu> <2917.825535313@time.cdrom.com> Sender: owner-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk Jordan K. Hubbard writes: > > if mrouted thinks the ed0 and sl0 are on the same network because > > of overlaping netmasks, it will not forward to sl0. > > Any chance of perhaps adding an option to *force* it to do so anyway? :-) > Actually, if mrouted would be really VLSM in that sense, it would consider the destination address of the p2p interface as having a mask of /32 and would be a happy camper. I would ask Bill about what's going to break if you 'fix' that :-) More elegant way would of course to fix your ip-addressing :-) It shouldn't hurt too much to dedicate a subnet of /30 to your sl0-pair. Pete