Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 12:00:54 -0400 From: Gary Palmer <gpalmer@freebsd.org> To: Daniel Nebdal <dnebdal@gmail.com> Cc: Zaphod Beeblebrox <zbeeble@gmail.com>, Yasir hussan <kolyasir@gmail.com>, Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: multi-homing in freebsd Message-ID: <20130316160054.GB52706@in-addr.com> In-Reply-To: <CA%2Bt49PJ0AarR%2Bdtc3dRfCg=ZmRHA730gCah3ZqBobFdVBmhJCg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAMwCe3T1f8Ze8AnS%2BAXzPxatH522qUH0brGTE5ZmduxazPyivA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMwCe3QgcQeL=yhxAkNLxKLESHJkRrMT=sFKds_Gqa29KQ_Atw@mail.gmail.com> <CACpH0Mf=sxF8eFVeSA9FMBHv-PpreFPD5LKzLE90xQxP2TBAKg@mail.gmail.com> <CAMwCe3SXygBW1seqiJuB9vGTpHJLs1udsPZ2%2B3hjm5dK5du2-g@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2Bt49PJ0AarR%2Bdtc3dRfCg=ZmRHA730gCah3ZqBobFdVBmhJCg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 01:29:27PM +0100, Daniel Nebdal wrote: > Going by Zaphod's recommendation of using a /32 for each IP, how about this? > > ifconfig arge0 inet 192.168.1.100/32 > ifconfig arge0 alias 192.169.1.100/32 > > I wouldn't recommend 192.169, though - only 192.168.x.x is reserved > for private networks, and 192.169 is a valid IP-routable prefix, > assigned to some US company. > To be exact: The ranges from RFC1918 are 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0 /20 > and 192.168.0.0/24. I think you mean the RFC1918 ranges are 10.0.0.0/8 (aka 10.0.0.0 through 10.255.255.255) 172.16.0.0/12 (aka 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.255.255) 192.168.0.0/16 (aka 192.168.0.0 through 192.168.255.255) Regards, Gary
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130316160054.GB52706>