From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John covici Subject: Re: IPTables : How to force data coming from ethX being output by the same device Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 11:21:29 -0400 Message-ID: <18447.21497.299984.726379@ccs.covici.com> References: <480F49BE.60600@solutti.com.br> <480F4CD9.4020006@solutti.com.br> Reply-To: covici@ccs.covici.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Leonardo_Rodrigues_Magalh=C3=A3es?= , ML netfilter The normal mailing list for routing related stuff seems to be broke or moved, anyone know what is going on with that? on Wednesday 04/23/2008 Jan Engelhardt(jengelh@computergmbh.de) wrote >=20 > On Wednesday 2008-04-23 16:51, Leonardo Rodrigues Magalh=E3es wrote: > > Jan Engelhardt escreveu: > >> On Wednesday 2008-04-23 16:37, Leonardo Rodrigues Magalh=E3es wro= te: =20 > >> =20 > >> > This is not iptables related, this is ROUTING related. > >> > > >> > iptables does not route packages. > >> > =20 > >> > >> apt/smart routes packages :p > > > > hmmmm i use Fedora, so i'll stick with yum :) > > > > sorry for that, i mean 'packets' and not 'packages'. > > > > iptables does not route network packets, that's done by kernel b= ased on the > > routing table entries. it's completly NOT iptables related. >=20 > It is not completely not related. By changing things such as > nfmark, TOS field, source or destination address, routing can > be influenced, so I would not say it's totally unrelated :) > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter"= in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html --=20 Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is: How do you spend it? John Covici covici@ccs.covici.com