Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 17:15:21 -0400 From: "Jonathan M. Slivko" <jslivko@blinx.net> To: "Steven Ames" <steve@virtual-voodoo.com>, "Chris Dillon" <cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us>, <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: Why two cards on the same segment... Message-ID: <005f01c11618$145b04a0$6401a8c0@equinox> 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> <011d01c11617$10b96950$28d90c42@eservoffice.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Then whats the alternative, it just works out of thin air? Now i'm really curious to find out how this is being done, although I have seen it done on my own systems in the past, just not by me, so i'm intrigued to find out how this is being accomplished. -- 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 5:07 PM Subject: Re: Why two cards on the same segment... > 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?005f01c11618$145b04a0$6401a8c0>