Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 11:40:54 -0800 (PST) From: "W. J. Williams" <will@willardjwilliams.com> To: Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com>, "W. J. Williams" <will@willardjwilliams.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: five networks Message-ID: <20030315194054.93598.qmail@web13508.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <3E734435.8090401@potentialtech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--- Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com> wrote: > W. J. Williams wrote: > > why isn`t this working: > > > > 1. I would like to configure a separate network on five freebsd boxes. > > > > 192.168.0 > > 192.168.1 > > 192.168.2 > > 192.168.3 > > 192.168.4 > > > > > > 2. My DSL router has network 192.168.0, I also have one of my fbsd > boxes > > in this network (192.168.0.2) > > > > 3. I can add the other machines to the 192.168.0 network, no problem, > > using default router 192.168.0.1, broadcast 255.255.255.0, > > > > 4. I tried to configure 192.168.2.1 on one box, using > > gateway_enable="YES", router_enable="YES", > > defaultrouter=192.168.2.1....doesnt work. > > > > what am i doing wrong in getting this box up and running? > > You don't understand routing. > If you ifconfig a box to be 192.168.2.1/24 and then set the default > router > to be 192.168.2.1: the machine sends all traffic not destined for > 192.168.2.0/24 to itself to be routed. However, it didn't know how > to route the traffic the first time, thus it isn't going to work the > second time either. One good rule to remember is that a default gateway > should always be a different machine, and one that has _more_ routing > capability that the one you're configuring. > If I understand your description correctly, the default gateway should > be 192.168.0.1 for all these machines. > I can only assume that you're configuring the system in such a manner > for experimental purposes, as I can see no reason for such a > configuration > in practice. > You leave netmasks off in your description, but I'm assuming that you're > using /24 for everything. This means you'll have to put static routes > in > each machine to allow them to get to 192.168.0.1, as they'll have no way > to automatically reach that machine. The default router will also need > routes manually configured in order to be able to communicate back to > them > (unless it's running some sort of route discovery program). > > If you're not configuring the network like this for experimental > reasons, > then you're configuring it very poorly. A small network like you > describe should have all the machines on the same subnet: 192.168.0.2, > 192.168.0.3, 192.168.0.4, etc > > -- > Bill Moran > Potential Technologies > http://www.potentialtech.com > yes, purely for experimenting...I have a lab of different pc'S and am LEARNING as much as possible about FreeBSD. Once I iron out this routing thing (that I don`t understand as well as most), I will move on to simulating a VPN between different sites throughout America. All the machines are currently in the same network, same subnet 192.168.0 Will ===== Will Williams To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030315194054.93598.qmail>