From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Jan 26 1:28:27 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from bryden.apana.org.au (bryden.apana.org.au [203.3.126.129]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B28637B698 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 01:28:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from roadrunner (roadrunner.apana.org.au [203.3.126.132]) by bryden.apana.org.au (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f0Q9RSA01839; Fri, 26 Jan 2001 19:27:29 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from dougy@bryden.apana.org.au) Message-ID: <009101c0877a$3df992e0$847e03cb@apana.org.au> From: "Doug Young" To: "Per Tore Larsen" , References: <25879E6A7E74D411B9370050043B7F3E09F913@RUBICON> Subject: Re: Two IP addresses for one interface Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 19:27:24 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_008C_01C087CE.0302C5E0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_008C_01C087CE.0302C5E0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thats what I've been trying ...... FreeBSD accepts that no problem, but = the=20 remote Win98 system complains that 255.255.255.255 is an illegal = netmask. The IPs aren't on same subnet though .... the initial one is a public = one with subnet 255.255.255.248 & the second is private (192.168.0.1).I've tried = various netmasks including 255.255.255.0 (FreeBSD complained that the remote=20 IP (192.168.0.2) was not in same subnet & 255.255.255.255 (Windows=20 complained about illegal netmask) ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Per Tore Larsen=20 To: 'Doug Young' ; freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG=20 Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 7:12 PM Subject: RE: Two IP addresses for one interface the second ip adress should be assign like below if the ip adress is on the same subnet you must use 255.255.255.255 as the netmask. if not use the appropriate netmask for the new ip address you are adding. ifconfig_xl0_alias0=3D"inet xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx netmask 255.255.255.255" ^^ ipadress PeTe -----Original Message----- From: Doug Young [mailto:dougy@bryden.apana.org.au] Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 7:24 AM To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Two IP addresses for one interface Is there any reason why one interface should NOT have two IP = addresses ?? My reason is to do with testing NAT .... I've got a problem thats = been driving me to distraction for ages & because it involves one of two tun's it = costs a mint to keep=20 dialling the incoming line to test changes. If I can try things on a = regular ethernet=20 interface I might have a chance of seeing whats not right without = enriching Tel$tra \any further. I guess the second (private) address is assigned similarly to the = first (public) one in /etc/rc.conf ??=20 ------=_NextPart_000_008C_01C087CE.0302C5E0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Thats what I've been trying ...... = FreeBSD=20 accepts that no problem, but = the

remote Win98 system complains that=20 255.255.255.255 is an illegal netmask.

The IPs aren't on same subnet though = .... the=20 initial one is a public one with

subnet 255.255.255.248 & the second = is private=20 (192.168.0.1).I've tried various

netmasks including 255.255.255.0 = (FreeBSD=20 complained that the remote

IP (192.168.0.2) was not in same subnet = &=20 255.255.255.255 (Windows

complained about illegal = netmask)

----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Per Tore Larsen =
To: 'Doug Young' ; freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.O= RG=20

Sent: Friday, January 26, 2001 = 7:12=20 PM

Subject: RE: Two IP addresses = for one=20 interface

the=20 second ip adress should be assign like below

if=20 the ip adress is on the same subnet you must use=20 255.255.255.255

as=20 the netmask. if not use the appropriate netmask for the new=20 ip

address you are adding.

ifconfig_xl0_alias0=3D"inet xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx netmask=20 255.255.255.255"

&nbs= p; = ; = =20 ^^ = ipadress

PeTe

-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Young=20 [mailto:dougy@bryden.apana.org.au]
Sent: Friday, January = 26, 2001=20 7:24 AM
To: = freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Two=20 IP addresses for one interface

Is there any reason why one = interface should=20 NOT have two IP addresses ??

My reason is to do with testing NAT = .... I've=20 got a problem thats been driving me

to distraction for ages & = because it=20 involves one of two tun's it costs a mint to keep

dialling the incoming line to test = changes. If=20 I can try things on a regular ethernet

interface I might have a chance of = seeing whats=20 not right without enriching Tel$tra \any further.

I guess the second (private) = address is=20 assigned similarly to the first (public) one

in /etc/rc.conf=20 ??

------=_NextPart_000_008C_01C087CE.0302C5E0-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message