On 27/10/2011 17:44, Theo de Raadt wrote:
NETWORK SYNCHRONISATION
States can be synchronised between two or more firewalls using this
interface, by specifying a synchronisation interface using ifconfig(8).
Heading back to my reading lessons ;) Thanks for pointing it out.
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 10:01:11AM -0500, Josh Hoppes wrote:
> > pfsync has been using multicast by default for a long time, I think
> > possibly from the start. You have to explicitly define a "syncpeer" if
> > you want it unicast. The list probably ignored the question because
> > the answer wa
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 10:01:11AM -0500, Josh Hoppes wrote:
> pfsync has been using multicast by default for a long time, I think
> possibly from the start. You have to explicitly define a "syncpeer" if
> you want it unicast. The list probably ignored the question because
> the answer was clear in
pfsync has been using multicast by default for a long time, I think
possibly from the start. You have to explicitly define a "syncpeer" if
you want it unicast. The list probably ignored the question because
the answer was clear in the documentation.
On 10/27/2011 03:16 PM, Laurent CARON wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:46:49PM +0200, Laurent CARON wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently wondering what is the best way to run pfsync between 4 hosts.
If I'm not mistaken, pfsync only has one interface, aka pfsync0
If I use it in unicast mode, i'm then stu
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 12:46:49PM +0200, Laurent CARON wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm currently wondering what is the best way to run pfsync between 4 hosts.
>
> If I'm not mistaken, pfsync only has one interface, aka pfsync0
>
> If I use it in unicast mode, i'm then stuck to 2 nodes.
>
> The option wou
Hi,
I'm currently wondering what is the best way to run pfsync between 4 hosts.
If I'm not mistaken, pfsync only has one interface, aka pfsync0
If I use it in unicast mode, i'm then stuck to 2 nodes.
The option would then be to have those 4 hosts exchange their states
over multicast.
Is it
7 matches
Mail list logo
