> On Thursday 26 March 2009 21:23:51 Steve Polyack wrote: > > Eric Bollengier wrote: > > > + /* Deduce the source IP address from our list of daemon addresses > */ > > > + src_ipaddr = (IPADDR *) src_addr_list->first(); > > > > > > Why did you take the first address from this list ? Don't you think > that > > > it can create an asymetric routing configuration when using multiple > > > network card or when using direct network attachment (with vlan) > > > > > > src_addr = (10.0.0.1, 192.168.1.1) (eth0, eth1) > > > src_ipaddr = 10.0.0.1 > > > > > > incomming_addr = 192.168.1.1 > > > > > > It will give a socket with this configuration : > > > src_ipaddr = 10.0.0.1 > > > dst_addr = 192.168.1.1 > > > > > > Packets will use eth1 to go, and will be back by eth0... > > > > > > Does it make sens ? > > > > Yes, it makes sense. This is a valid concern. I'm beginning to much > > prefer the addition of an additional Director and FileD configuration > > resource. I could add DirSourceAddress and FDSourceAddress options and > > use the default (non-binding) socket behavior if these are not present. > > This way this would affect no users who do not explicitly choose to use > > the feature. > > Yes, even if it means adding extra directives, which we are trying to > avoid, > it would be much better not to change existing behavior without the user > explicitly choosing to do so. That fits much better with how we normally > add > new features to Bacula. >
This would be a great feature to have, but I for one would definitely like the ability to choose the bind IF in configuration. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Bacula-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-devel
