On 11.05.2009, at 23:31, Dan White wrote:
Chris Meidinger wrote:
Hi,
This is a pretty moronic question, but I've been searching RFC's on-
and-off for a couple of weeks and can't find an answer. So I'm
hoping someone here will know it offhand.
I've been looking through RFC's trying to find a clear statement
that having two interfaces in the same subnet does not work, but
can't find it that statement anywhere.
The OS in this case is Linux. I know it can be done with clever
routing and prioritization and such, but this has to do with
vanilla config, just setting up two interfaces in one network.
I would be grateful for a pointer to such an RFC statement,
assuming it exists.
If your goal is to achieve redundancy or to increase bandwidth, you
can bond the interfaces together - assuming that you have a switch /
switch stack that supports 802.3ad.
Then you could assign multiple IPs to the bonded interface without
any layer 3 messyness.
I should have been clearer. The case in point is having two physical
interfaces, each with a unique IP, in the same subnet.
For example, eth0 is 10.0.0.1/24 and eth1 is 10.0.0.2/24, nothing like
bonding going on. The customers usually have the idea of running one
interface for administration and another for production (which is a
_good_ idea) but they want to do it in the same subnet (not such a
good idea...)
Chris
