From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?B?TGVvbmFyZG8gUm9kcmlndWVzIE1hZ2FsaMOjZXM=?= Subject: Re: IPTables : How to force data coming from ethX being output by the same device Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:38:00 -0300 Message-ID: <480F57D8.1060704@solutti.com.br> References: <480F49BE.60600@solutti.com.br> <480F4CD9.4020006@solutti.com.br> 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="macroman"; format="flowed" To: Jan Engelhardt Cc: ML netfilter Jan Engelhardt escreveu: > > 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 :) > =20 Changing all these parameters will do nothing if you dont have=20 appropriate routing rules that uses them as routing criteria parameters= =2E Well .... yes, it's not completly unrelated, iptables really can=20 'help' routing decisions with those things. iptables can be used to help routing decisions, but this is not the= =20 only way of doing it. You can have your source routing rules and get=20 advanced routing without iptables rules, it's not required, but yes can= =20 be used sometimes. On pretty advanced routing situations, maybe iptable= s=20 'helping' rules would be necessary, but advanced routing can be done=20 without iptables. --=20 Atenciosamente / Sincerily, Leonardo Rodrigues Solutti Tecnologia http://www.solutti.com.br Minha armadilha de SPAM, N=C3=83O mandem email gertrudes@solutti.com.br My SPAMTRAP, do not email it