BindSpecific Vs. Preferred Interface on routes

[Guest.Visitor]

I'm having a difficult time understanding the difference between turning BindSpecific on for a server instance versus specifying a preferred interface for a route. Our problem is that a transaction comes in on a 10.10.10.2 address and then goes out on a 10.10.10.3 address. We need transactions to both enter and exit on the same interface address in order for the firewalls to work correctly. We are hosting a minimum of two web sites, with separate interfaces available for each site. IBM support suggested defining two default routes and defining a duplicate route priority of 4. This suggests that we are having an AS/400 routing problem and not a bind problem. Any suggestions?? Thanks, Annette

[Guest.Visitor]

I'm having a difficult time understanding the difference between turning BindSpecific on for a server instance versus specifying a preferred interface for a route. BindSpecific on means the server instance will only listen to one IP address or host name. This should have nothing to do with the route. Our problem is that a transaction comes in on a 10.10.10.2 address and then goes out on a 10.10.10.3 address. We need transactions to both enter and exit on the same interface address in order for the firewalls to work correctly. We are hosting a minimum of two web sites, with separate interfaces available for each site. I am not quite sure how could that happen. If that is the case, I guess it could be either the routing issue or you need some PTF. IBM support suggested defining two default routes and defining a duplicate route priority of 4. This suggests that we are having an AS/400 routing problem and not a bind problem. AS/400 do allow you to define more than one default route. However, only the first one will be used unless the system detects that route is down. In most case, the route to the Internet should be your default route, which is your secure size firewall IP address. Hope this help. Shawn Fu