Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 16:07:59 -0500 From: "Steven Ames" <steve@virtual-voodoo.com> To: "Jonathan M. Slivko" <jslivko@blinx.net>, "Chris Dillon" <cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us>, <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Why two cards on the same segment... Message-ID: <011d01c11617$10b96950$28d90c42@eservoffice.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.32.0107261528390.2406-100000@mail.wolves.k12.mo.us> <001701c11614$94114000$6401a8c0@equinox> <00fa01c11615$73cccb10$28d90c42@eservoffice.com> <003401c11616$d2a8e460$6401a8c0@equinox>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Not really. The private IP space probably never leaves that LAN segment so the source IP would get set properly and the default route is irrelevent. Whenever he communicated with a block that is not diretly attached then the code has to choose a source address and then send the packet to the next hop (usually the default route unless you have a dynamic protocol daemon (routed/gated/etc) running. As long as your just communicating to directly attached subnets everything will work peachy regardless of public/private/quantity/netmask. -Steve > Yes, but what that snippet showed from ifconfig showed 2 networks, 2 from > public IP space and 1 from private IP space, and since it's working the > networking code must know/care about something that it's being fed. -- > Jonathan > > -- > Jonathan M. Slivko <jslivko@blinx.net> > Blinx Networks > http://www.blinx.net/ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steven Ames" <steve@virtual-voodoo.com> > To: "Jonathan M. Slivko" <jslivko@blinx.net>; "Chris Dillon" > <cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us>; <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> > Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 4:56 PM > Subject: Re: Why two cards on the same segment... > > > > > 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 why it wouldn't work. > > > However, if your talking about a routable > > > IP address, then you might have a problem, as there is a difference > > between > > > a virtual IP address and a real (routable) > > > IP address. Just my 0.02 cents. -- Jonathan > > > > 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 address gets > > used as the 'source IP' on packets leaving the system. > > > > -Steve > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?011d01c11617$10b96950$28d90c42>