Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 08 Nov 1996 10:39:17 -0500
From:      John Duncan <jddst19+@pitt.edu>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Suggestion for iijppp's demand dial.
Message-ID:  <32835425.167EB0E7@pitt.edu>

Next in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
IIJPPP is neato, I thought, except it ended up being not worth
using because of its clumsy interface and the fact that it would
only demand-dial if you had a preset default route. I don't have one.

Perhaps there could be an additional lkm-style network driver that
would use about 2k at the most called 'iijdd0' which would be the
demand-dial line that programs could use, and when something came
through iijdd0, it would route it to whatever ended up being the default
route through which iijppp would normally send the data after dialing.
I think that would be much easier to set up, in the long run, so we
wouldn't have to play around with those annoying network numbers.

My problem here is that at Pitt, we have machines named ehdup-#.ts.net
and each of those routers has 16 hardwired lines, ehdup-#-x.rmt.net
and those hardwired lines all have unique addresses, registered with
the nameserver. Chances of getting the same router twice are like 1 in
30.

So what I was thinking was that localhost could be connected to
imaginary as the default route, and when a packet came down the
imaginary route, 10.17.32.1 or whatever you please, it would wait until
iijppp dialed and connected tun0, and then it would route the packet
through the point on tun0 once that route was established.

Furthermore, we would be able to run Kerberos, timed, and other
network-based things over tun0 without requiring a dedicated line.
Hmm... the possibilities are endless.

-jd



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?32835425.167EB0E7>