χ Thu, 06.06.2002, Χ 22:43, Marko Zec ΞΑΠΙΣΑΜ:
> In your original post, you were suggesting to put the same IP/mask on different
> "real" interfaces, not loopback. Could you pls. try to create a couple of vlan
> interfaces (ifconfig vlan0 create...), than configure them with the same IP
> addresses/masks as you suggested earlier, and show us the results of this
> procedure? On my 4.6-RC system, such thing just don't work, thanks God.
Ok EEXISTS message you have is because kernel can't add one more route
for same address, it need to help kernel a bit:
vbook#/home/vova 121_> ifconfig vlan0 create
vbook#/home/vova 122_> ifconfig vlan1 create
vbook#/home/vova 123_> ifconfig vlan2 create
vbook#/home/vova 124_> ifconfig vlan0 vlan 1 vlandev fxp0
vbook#/home/vova 125_> ifconfig vlan1 vlan 2 vlandev fxp0
vbook#/home/vova 126_> ifconfig vlan2 vlan 3 vlandev fxp0
vbook#/home/vova 127_> ifconfig fxp0 1.1.1.1/24
vbook#/home/vova 128_> ifconfig vlan0 1.1.1.1/32
vbook#/home/vova 129_> route delete 1.1.1.1
delete host 1.1.1.1
vbook#/home/vova 130_> ifconfig vlan1 1.1.1.1/32
vbook#/home/vova 131_> route delete 1.1.1.1
delete host 1.1.1.1
vbook#/home/vova 132_> ifconfig vlan2 1.1.1.1/32
vbook#/home/vova 133_> ifconfig -a
lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 16384
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000
fxp0: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu
1500
inet 1.1.1.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 1.1.1.255
ether 08:00:46:04:31:b3
media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX)
status: active
vlan0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 1.1.1.1 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 1.1.1.1
ether 08:00:46:04:31:b3
vlan: 1 parent interface: fxp0
vlan1: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 1.1.1.1 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 1.1.1.1
ether 08:00:46:04:31:b3
vlan: 2 parent interface: fxp0
vlan2: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 1.1.1.1 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 1.1.1.1
ether 08:00:46:04:31:b3
vlan: 3 parent interface: fxp0
(sorry, I forget about such simple thing because rare use more then one
address with same mask)
PS:
about this in kernel code there is beautiful comment (XXX part):
/*-
* Don't add host routes for interface addresses of
* 0.0.0.0 --> 0.255.255.255 netmask 255.0.0.0. This makes it
* possible to assign several such address pairs with consistent
* results (no host route) and is required by BOOTP.
*
* XXX: This is ugly ! There should be a way for the caller to
* say that they don't want a host route.
*/
> Marko
>
--
Vladimir B. Grebenschikov
[EMAIL PROTECTED], SWsoft, Inc.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
