> > Seyyed Mohtadin Hashemi wrote: > > Bob Proulx wrote: > > > Is there some reason that you are choosing not to use a switch that > > > you haven't told us about? > > > > I have no reason other than I'm trying different network configurations to > > learn how to do different things. I already have established a network > > config using a switch that did all the things i described earlier, i > wanted > > to see is it was possible to make it work only using NICs. >
> Learning is good! I am fully supportive of gaining experience with > different configurations. > > In this case a configuration which might be more generally useful > would be a router configuration. Instead of bridging (or bonding) > different network cards together something which I often need to do is > to set up a route between them. (Windows calls this Internet > Sharing.) If you were trying different configurations for the > purposes of learning then I would definitely queue up a router > configuration. > > My favorite helper for this is Shorewall. It builds the iptables > rules from simpler rules. I like it. Others like other tools. Still > others like writing everything in small detail themselves. For > something that I think is useful to work through I would look through > this documentation and work through the examples there. > Thanks, i'll make sure to do some experiments during this or the next week. > > http://www.shorewall.net/two-interface.htm > > Bob > As for the original problem, the bridge config you suggested works. I tested the connection speed and integrity by transferring a 1gb file several times between the different computers, this is the results i got: For bonded network: desktop 1 --> server: 399Mbit desktop 2 --> server: 387Mbit desktop 1 --> desktop 2: Host unreachable For bridged network: desktop 1 --> server: 834Mbit desktop 2 --> server: 832Mbit desktop 1 --> desktop 2: 390Mbit have a nice day.
