On Thu, 27 Nov 2008, Frank Behrens wrote:
Hi,
I am running out the door but ... will check again tonight.
Bjoern A. Zeeb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 27 Nov 2008 14:53:
[gif-like ipsec and routes]
routes are not alternatives for fixing applications;) Often it's easier
to apply a hack instead of fix the application but that's a different
story...
So is your 192.168.90.0/24 on any other interface but the lo2?
Is it the only network on that interface or are there aliases?
For this machine the simplified setup is:
- an ethernet interface for private net with address 192.168.90.1/24
and additional aliases for external addresses
...
Now I want to tunnel between my 192.168.90.0/24 and a foreign
192.168.200.0/24. So I assigned 192.168.90.254/32 to lo2 and created
a static route.
So if you don't mind to go out with a source address of 192.168.90.1
instead of .254, what about this hack. What happens if you change the
route to
route change -net 192.168.200.0/24 192.168.90.2
(assuming the .2 is not on your local machine).
/bz
--
Bjoern A. Zeeb Stop bit received. Insert coin for new game.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
