On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Steven Ames wrote:
> public IP space. I might be off here but I think the real problem with
> two seperate networks on one card (or even on two cards) would be
> the default route (can't have two right?) and which IP address gets
> used as the 'source IP' on packets leaving t
Matt Dillon wrote:
> I wish it were that easy. If you have two interfaces on the same LAN
> segment, but one is configured with an internal IP and one is
> configured with an external IP, and the default route points out the
> interface configured with the external IP, then you ar
Steven Ames wrote:
>
> You lost me. How what is being done? You can use ifconfig to assign
> as many blocks/netmasks as you feel the urge to. It'll do it.
Actually, you'll get an "address in use" error; it will
add the IP alias to the card, but in fact, it will not
really dso the job: the ifconf
Steven Ames wrote:
> I don't think the networking code knows/cares if something is private or
> public IP space. I might be off here but I think the real problem with
> two seperate networks on one card (or even on two cards) would be
> the default route (can't have two right?) and which IP addres
:..
:> You have to explicitly bind to the correct source IP if you care.
:>
:> For our machines I bind our external services specifically to the
:> external IP. Beyond that I usually don't care because I NAT-out our
:> internal IP space anyway, so any packets sent 'from' an inter
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 05:24:43PM -0500, Chris Dillon wrote:
> Hmm.. That hasn't been my experience at all. I have _always_ seen
> outgoing connections use a source address of the closest interface
> address that exists on the same IP network as the destination, OR, if
> it is a non-local destin
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Matt Dillon wrote:
> I wish it were that easy. If you have two interfaces on the same LAN
> segment, but one is configured with an internal IP and one is
> configured with an external IP, and the default route points out the
> interface configured with the ex
> I cannot believe its random. On the other hand (haven't tried this in
FBSD,
> but in Solaris it works),
> if you assign an interface like this:
>
> ifconfig ed0 inet 204.120.165.1 netmask 0xff00
> ifconfig ed0 inet 204.120.165.2 netmask 0xff00
Second line should read:
ifconfig ed0 inet
> If you have one interface with *two* ip addresses. For example
(taking
> a real life example):
>
> ash:/home/dillon> ifconfig
> fxp0: flags=8843 mtu 1500
> inet 208.161.114.66 netmask 0xffc0 broadcast 208.161.114.127
> inet 10.0.0.3 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Jonathan M. Slivko wrote:
> Yes, but, I think the issue with the 2 IP classes working is
> because one is not routable, and therefore it's not a real
> IP address, and the router knows this, hence it's not reacting to
> it by stopping to work. As long as you use virtual ip's
s" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
:> To: "Jonathan M. Slivko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Chris Dillon"
:> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
:> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:56 PM
:> Subject: Re: Why two cards on the same segment...
:>
:>
:>
/
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Steven Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Jonathan M. Slivko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Chris Dillon"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 5:07 PM
ko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Blinx Networks
http://www.blinx.net/
- Original Message -
From: "Steven Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jonathan M. Slivko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Chris Dillon"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent:
//www.blinx.net/
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Steven Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Jonathan M. Slivko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Chris Dillon"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2
nx Networks
http://www.blinx.net/
- Original Message -
From: "Steven Ames" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jonathan M. Slivko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Chris Dillon"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:56 PM
Subject
> Yes, but, I think the issue with the 2 IP classes working is because one
is
> not routable, and therefore it's not a real
> IP address, and the router knows this, hence it's not reacting to it by
> stopping to work. As long as you use virtual
> ip's (192.168.*.*) then there should be no reason
t;Eugene L. Vorokov"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Soren Kristensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:45 PM
Subject: Re: Why two cards on the same segment...
> On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Terry Lambert wrote:
&
Hi,
Alfred Perlstein wrote:
>
> > > > > Things seem to work fine now, but I still get a lot of those:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Jul 26 00:43:48 test256m /kernel: arp: 192.168.1.4 is on sis0 but got
> > > > > reply from 00:a0:cc:a0:d4:07 on sis1"
> > > > >
> > > > > Anybody know how to turn them off ?
18 matches
Mail list logo
