Multiple routing tables Or Policy routing for Dragonfly

[Matthew Dillon]

I'm really not happy with the way FreeBSD implemented multiple routing
tables and I don't really want to see those massive hacks brought into
DragonFly.  I don't know what the best solution is per-say.  Probably
better to hang a pointer directly off the kernel thread structure
(sys/thread.h) and have a separate kernel domain topology rather than using
jails.

-Matt

On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 11:11 PM, Matthias Rampke <
matthias.rampke at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Three scenarios come to mind:
>
> 1) different routing for (some) VMs or Jails from the host (host uses one
> internet connection, jail uses another)
> 2) ditto, but for unjailed processes or users
> 3) different routing for (certain) forwardings
>
> I have implemented 3) without multiple routing tables, just using pf, in
> OpenBSD[0], but have not yet checked if this is possible with Dragonfly pf.
> I failed at 1) once due to the lack of multiple routing tables but did not
> know the pf way at the time.
>
> /Matthias
>
> [0] http://rampke.de/posts/ipv6-openvpn/
>
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014, 02:33 bycn82 <bycn82 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> * In what kind of scenario you are going to use the "multiple routing
> table" (FIB in FreeBSD)? if you are familiar with it. *
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20141212/25f0144e/attachment-0002.html>