Hello, I'm using pd on a debian computer with multiple interfaces.
Is there a way for choosing the interface from whom data are sent?
pc
[netreceive] has an optional hostname argument that allows to bind to a specific network interface, but there is no equivalent for [netsend].
Generally, manually specifying the network interface for outgoing traffic is not straight forward. See for example https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16970361/binding-to-networking-interface....
Why would you need that in the first place?
|Christof |
On 21.01.2025 17:05, Patko nytkophilus wrote:
Hello, I'm using pd on a debian computer with multiple interfaces.
Is there a way for choosing the interface from whom data are sent?
pc
pd-list@lists.iem.at - the Pure Data mailinglist https://lists.iem.at/hyperkitty/list/pd-list@lists.iem.at/message/5SBXSA3N6Y...
To unsubscribe send an email topd-list-leave@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->https://lists.iem.at/
Le 21 janv. 2025 à 17:23, Christof Ressi info@christofressi.com a écrit :
[netreceive] has an optional hostname argument that allows to bind to a specific network interface, but there is no equivalent for [netsend].
Generally, manually specifying the network interface for outgoing traffic is not straight forward. See for example https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16970361/binding-to-networking-interface... https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16970361/binding-to-networking-interfaces-in-ruby/17115602.
thanks for the link
Why would you need that in the first place?
we have two subnets, and we don't want them to be merged topologicaly. We use one interface to receive messages, and we want the patch processing to send the output packet on the other interface only.
best regards
pc
Am 21. Jänner 2025 23:24:40 MEZ schrieb Patko nytkophilus colet.patrice@gmail.com:
Why would you need that in the first place?
we have two subnets, and we don't want them to be merged topologicaly. We use one interface to receive messages, and we want the patch processing to send the output packet on the other interface only.
best regards
pc
Shouldn't this be handled by your os's routing table? The only exception I can think of would be sending broadcast/multicast messages.
mfg.sfg.jfd IOhannes
as long as you make sure the two subnets arent overlapping (also in routes), the routing table of OS should take care of figuring out what interface to use.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 8:44 AM IOhannes m zmölnig zmoelnig@iem.at wrote:
Am 21. Jänner 2025 23:24:40 MEZ schrieb Patko nytkophilus < colet.patrice@gmail.com>:
Why would you need that in the first place?
we have two subnets, and we don't want them to be merged topologicaly. We
use one interface to receive messages, and we want the patch processing to send the output packet on the other interface only.
best regards
pc
Shouldn't this be handled by your os's routing table? The only exception I can think of would be sending broadcast/multicast messages.
mfg.sfg.jfd IOhannes
pd-list@lists.iem.at - the Pure Data mailinglist
https://lists.iem.at/hyperkitty/list/pd-list@lists.iem.at/message/H3AGD66R25...
To unsubscribe send an email to pd-list-leave@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.iem.at/