From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 19 12:59:00 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EEA816A4CE for ; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 12:59:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk [81.2.69.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0041A43D1D for ; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 12:58:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: from happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk (localhost.infracaninophile.co.uk [IPv6:::1])i3JJw9v5089144 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 19 Apr 2004 20:58:09 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from matthew@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: (from matthew@localhost)id i3JJw9Mt089143; Mon, 19 Apr 2004 20:58:09 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from matthew) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 20:58:08 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman To: Danny Message-ID: <20040419195808.GB52650@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Matthew Seaman , Danny , questions@freebsd.org References: <20040419190652.M88645@eagleroaming.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cvVnyQ+4j833TQvp" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040419190652.M88645@eagleroaming.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Virus-Scanned: clamd / ClamAV version devel-20040416, clamav-milter version 0.70g X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Simple Router on FreeBSD - Which should I use? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 19:59:00 -0000 --cvVnyQ+4j833TQvp Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 03:06:51PM -0500, Danny wrote: > I would like to setup a simple router, for the following: >=20 > Enable a 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 network talk to a 10.10.0.0 255.255.0.= 0=20 > network, and obviously vise versa. Just setup your FreeBSD box with an interface on each network, and put 'gateway_enable=3D"YES"' into /etc/rc.conf Trivially easy. =20 > Now the 10.10.0.0 is tentative, so I am also wondering on a network with = less=20 > then 240 network nodes, if a 255.255.0.0 subnet mask would cause any=20 > disadvantages, versus using a 255.255.255.0 subnet mask?=20 It hardly makes a difference either way. Seeing as they're all RFC 1918 network blocks (or should I say RFC 3330 nowadays?) presumably they're on a private internet and you can do what you like there. Cheers, Matthew --=20 Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 26 The Paddocks Savill Way PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Marlow Tel: +44 1628 476614 Bucks., SL7 1TH UK --cvVnyQ+4j833TQvp Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFAhC9QdtESqEQa7a0RAiltAJ9N54wKbsZDSonNXd/4zS7T44kdogCdFM3X J5GAJ/+r7bCO7xS9FtBv+FY= =+7wz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --cvVnyQ+4j833TQvp--