Subject: Re: How to get multi-homed ATM/Ethernet sparcs talking?

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 17:16:54 PST

>Geee, now it's "FreeBSD" tun ? I remember to have hacked on this kiddy
>6 years ago in SunOS... ;-))

I should have said "Like the tun device that comes in FreeBSD."
I was aware that it had deeper roots than that but was just trying
to give an example.

It occurs to me that mrouted's current handling of P2P interfaces
can't handle a tunnel set up in the manner I described, so I have
to revise my answer and say that you can't do it with mrouted 3.8 .
I have a design for new P2P support in my head but it's not in
mrouted yet.

  Bill

---

From: Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 02:21:29 +0100 (MET)

> I have a design for new P2P support in my head but it's not in

Yes, ok. I see the point. Is there a generic working strategy for
using the loopback interface ? I didn't want to give it to much effort
first-hand, because IMHO the whole setup i'm required to do is just
a big pain in the *** (one specific simplex interface).

---

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 18:33:51 PST

In message <[email-masked]> you write:
>Is there a generic working strategy for using the loopback interface ?

Nope; you'd have to fix up the source address (since you can't route
packets from 127.0.0.1 on the MBone) and that involves kernel hackery.

I should note that while Anders Klemets was here, he created some
kernel patches and associated mrouted stuff to do what you want
(administratively state that packets are not to actually go out
an interface).  It only worked on multicast-capable interfaces,
though, and our view of the problem we were solving was mostly
for machines with non-multicast-capable interfaces, so we never
cleaned it up for release.  I could send you the patches, but you'd
have to have kernel source for them to be worthwhile.

  Bill