[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 From:  "Martin Holst" <mail at martinh dot dk>
 To:  "Dinesh Nair" <dinesh at alphaque dot com>
 Cc:  <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  SV: SV: [m0n0wall] Re: Small bug: NAT rules with optional interfaces
 Date:  Tue, 11 May 2004 10:01:04 +0200
You're right. No solution was found.
Look forward to hearing if you have any luck with it ;o)


Fra: Dinesh Nair [mailto:dinesh at alphaque dot com]
Sendt: ti 11-05-2004 09:52
Til: Martin Holst
Cc: m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch
Emne: Re: SV: [m0n0wall] Re: Small bug: NAT rules with optional interfaces

On Tue, 11 May 2004, Martin Holst wrote:

> Dinesh: Thoug dual WAN w. load balancing has been brought up before, it
> definitely sounds interesting ;o)

it has, but no solution was found ? or was there, and i missed it ?

ipnat has an option for round robin redirects, and i'll check if it can be
implented using that.

Regards,                           /\_/\   "All dogs go to heaven."
dinesh at alphaque dot com                (0 0)    http://www.alphaque.com/
| for a in past present future; do                                        |
|   for b in clients employers associates relatives neighbours pets; do   |
|   echo "The opinions here in no way reflect the opinions of my $a $b."  |
| done; done                                                              |