Now, i came up with the following: when using pppoe kernel support,
should i use the pppoe interface or the real/physical interface?
thanks in advance.
On 8/9/06, Ryan McBride [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 12:33:23PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
Why the carp interface
* Gustavo Rios [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-08-07 04:46]:
I am playing with openbsd PF, and i read the text below:
(http://www.countersiege.com/doc/pfsync-carp/)
When writing the rest of the pf ruleset, it is important to keep in
mind that from pf's perspective, all traffic comes from the
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 12:33:23PM +0200, Henning Brauer wrote:
Why the carp interface cannot be used in context of the interface?
well, because it is that way.
Because of the way that the routing currently works, if both the carpdev
'physical' interface and the carp interfaces have
I am playing with openbsd PF, and i read the text below:
(http://www.countersiege.com/doc/pfsync-carp/)
When writing the rest of the pf ruleset, it is important to keep in
mind that from pf's perspective, all traffic comes from the physical
interface, even if it is routed through the carp
4 matches
Mail list logo
