Re: Multiple Routing Tables (FIB) + IPFW problem as (I?) expected

From: Eduardo Meyer <dudu.meyer_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 13:40:40 -0200
> obviously you did some other commands here..
> something generated 2 million packets..

Julian, its a production enviroment, firewall was up for a few
minutes. Thats the reason.

> I was thinking of adding a 'reroute' ipfw keyword.. kind of like
> 'fwd {original dest} ip from any to any'
> because 'fwd' does cause the routing decision to be redone.
>
> The fib of the process that opens the socket controls where packets from the
> local machine are sent.

divert does cause this too, not "not fib X" seems to work fine...

I wish you could make the "setfib" action be kept in state with
keep-state only for the static rules, but I guess it will be done for
all dynamic rules too, since keep-state makes dynamic rules repeat the
static one, right?

would something like

ipfw add prob 0.5 setfib 1 all from X to any out keep-state

be used to balance (per session) between FIB tables?

>
>
>
>
>



-- 
===========
Eduardo Meyer
pessoal: dudu.meyer_at_gmail.com
profissional: ddm.farmaciap_at_saude.gov.br
Received on Mon Jan 19 2009 - 14:40:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:40 UTC