[bf1942] VOIP and sv.interfaceIP/sv.serverIP

[David Stevens]

I believe it has something to do with bandwidth monitoring.. but I am not
sure.


-----Original Message-----
From: sjdel at nycap.rr.com [mailto:sjdel at nycap.rr.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 3:11 PM
To: bf1942 at icculus.org
Subject: Re: RE: [bf1942] VOIP and sv.interfaceIP/sv.serverIP

That would be them :)  I've run into a number of situations where that has
been a real pain... why not just use 2 
physical interfaces, one theirs, one the clients. Would solve so many
problems.

----- Original Message -----
From: David Stevens <dave at netdefense.ca>
Date: Tuesday, July 5, 2005 5:03 pm
Subject: RE: [bf1942] VOIP and sv.interfaceIP/sv.serverIP

> Same situation, no solution as of yet.
> 
> I have asked the ISP if I can use the "not allowed" IP..  they 
> still have
> not got back to me..
> 
> Are you using 15minuteservers?
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sjdel at nycap.rr.com [mailto:sjdel at nycap.rr.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 2:15 PM
> To: bf1942 at icculus.org
> Subject: [bf1942] VOIP and sv.interfaceIP/sv.serverIP
> 
> Don't know if this has been addressed yet or not, if so, I'll dig 
> some more
> through my list emails...
> 
> I have a server whose primary IP on my ethernet interface isn't 
> supposed to
> be used for anything.  I have 12 
> other virtual IPs defined and have our bf2 server on the first virtual
> interface.
> 
> as we know, in this situation, you need to have both sv.serverIP and
> sv.interfaceIP defined in order for the 
> server to bind to a specific port. Problem here is that VOIP will 
> still bind
> to 0.0.0.0:55124-55125.
> 
> Anyone in a similar situation find a solution to this?
> 
> 
> 
>