| To: | Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] MASQUERADE / policy routing ("Route send us somewhere else") |
| From: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 31 Aug 2004 20:12:03 +1000 |
| Cc: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.LNX.4.44.0408311208500.1773-100000@l> |
| References: | <20040831082339.GA949@gondor.apana.org.au> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0408311208500.1773-100000@l> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i |
On Tue, Aug 31, 2004 at 12:41:35PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote: > > > Here is an untested patch which does exactly that? Please do your > > best to break it :) > > No need for tests :) rt_spec_dst is your preferred src > to the sender (your local internal IP) and rt_src is the internal > IP of the sender (what we snat). I knew it can't be that easy :) So let's go back to the previous idea of using inet_select_addr? Can you find any problems with this? In fact, it seems that the 2.2 compatibility code does exactly this. Cheers, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
|
| Previous by Date: | [PATCH] Fix CONFIG_COMPAT with !CONFIG_NET, Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [RFC] MASQUERADE / policy routing ("Route send us somewhere else"), Henrik Nordstrom |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [RFC] MASQUERADE / policy routing ("Route send us somewhere else"), Julian Anastasov |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [RFC] MASQUERADE / policy routing ("Route send us somewhere else"), Julian Anastasov |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |