On mar. 20 déc. 09:57:44 2016, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 20.12.2016 4:01, Alarig Le Lay пишет:
> > On Tue Dec 20 02:34:29 2016, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> > > Well, you can always use brute force instead:
> > >
> > > ipfw nat 169 config reset ip 89.234.186.1 && \
> > > ipfw add 60 nat 169 ip from 169
20.12.2016 4:01, Alarig Le Lay пишет:
On Tue Dec 20 02:34:29 2016, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
Well, you can always use brute force instead:
ipfw nat 169 config reset ip 89.234.186.1 && \
ipfw add 60 nat 169 ip from 169.254.0.0/16 to any out xmit igb0
That's ugly but works.
I will work just by si
On 19/12/2016 21:01, Alarig Le Lay wrote:
On Tue Dec 20 02:34:29 2016, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
Well, you can always use brute force instead:
ipfw nat 169 config reset ip 89.234.186.1 && \
ipfw add 60 nat 169 ip from 169.254.0.0/16 to any out xmit igb0
That's ugly but works.
I will work just b
On Tue Dec 20 02:34:29 2016, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> Well, you can always use brute force instead:
>
> ipfw nat 169 config reset ip 89.234.186.1 && \
> ipfw add 60 nat 169 ip from 169.254.0.0/16 to any out xmit igb0
>
> That's ugly but works.
I will work just by side effect: by doing this, I wi
20.12.2016 2:05, Alarig Le Lay пишет:
On Tue Dec 20 01:51:17 2016, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
20.12.2016 1:46, Alarig Le Lay пишет:
Is it possible to avoid this behaviour and reply with the public IP
(89.234.186.1) instead?
try: sysctl net.inet.icmp.reply_from_interface=1
If an AS choose to go
On Tue Dec 20 01:51:17 2016, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
> 20.12.2016 1:46, Alarig Le Lay пишет:
>
> > Is it possible to avoid this behaviour and reply with the public IP
> > (89.234.186.1) instead?
>
> try: sysctl net.inet.icmp.reply_from_interface=1
If an AS choose to go to us thought this peer, pa
20.12.2016 1:46, Alarig Le Lay пишет:
Is it possible to avoid this behaviour and reply with the public IP
(89.234.186.1) instead?
try: sysctl net.inet.icmp.reply_from_interface=1
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mai
Hi,
I have a router that is mutli-homed with BGP. One of my peers is using
an RFC3927 address for the connection. If I traceroute to host behind
that route where we use a route via this peer to reply, the ICMP reply
display that link-local IP:
1. AS12876 195-154-86-1.rev.poneytelecom.eu (195.15