IPfilter
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: keep state "issue" / possible feature for the future?

To: ipfilter@coombs.anu.edu.au
Subject: Re: keep state "issue" / possible feature for the future?
From: Jefferson Ogata <Jefferson.Ogata@noaa.gov>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 15:05:16 +0000
Delivered-to: sp-com-lists@consult.net
Delivered-to: ipfilter-list@securepoint.com
In-reply-to: <200703021153.l22BrDXq006406@anumail9.anu.edu.au>
References: <200703011819.l21IJmJo029596@anumail7.anu.edu.au> <45E72401.4050403@ucdavis.edu> <200703021153.l22BrDXq006406@anumail9.anu.edu.au>
Sender: owner-ipfilter@coombs.anu.edu.au
User-agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible;MSIE 5.5; Windows 98)
Boy, I just love responding to a top-posted rats nest. Learn a little
netiquette, people.

On 2007-03-02 11:53, chrisj@ucia.gov wrote:
> Solaris does indeed use the multiple interfaces
> in a seemingly random way (well, it really isn't
> random ... I'm sure there is a very logical approach
> but to the occasional telnet, ssh, scp, or NFS
> application it appears random :-).

Is this (or at least the original poster's issue) not something that is
controlled via ip_strict_dst_multihoming?

-- 
Jefferson Ogata <Jefferson.Ogata@noaa.gov>
NOAA Computer Incident Response Team (N-CIRT) <ncirt@noaa.gov>
"Never try to retrieve anything from a bear."--National Park Service

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>