Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 20:27:47 +1100 (EST) From: "Daniel O'Callaghan" <danny@panda.hilink.com.au> To: Darius Moos <moos@degnet.baynet.de> Cc: FreeBSD-questions <questions@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Is this network possible with FreeBSD ??? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.961031202046.3907R-100000@panda.hilink.com.au> In-Reply-To: <3278806D.2FA6@degnet.baynet.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 4. FreeBSD: > ifconfig ed0 inet 1.2.3.253 broadcast 1.2.3.36 > The problem: > The Router (1.2.3.36) was found but again all other hosts on > the 1.2.3.x-net were not found Huh!?! Why on earth do you have .253 and .36 on the same wire, which is a separate wire from the rest of that network. No wonder it does not work. You should really get two IP addresses close together - .35 and .36 and use netmask 0xfffffffc. If you *have* to use .253 and .36, and you can't get a more sensible pair from your ISP, my preferred option would be to change ISP. Failing that, ifconfig ed0 1.2.3.253 netmask 0xfffffffc arp -s 1.2.3.254 0:0:0:0:0:0 (substitute ethernet address of router) route add default 1.2.3.254 But I'm still baffled as to how your router knows that .253 is on one link and the rest of 1.2.3.x is on another link. Danny > +---------------+ > | FreeBSD-2.1.0 | > |+-------------+| > || NE 2000 || > || 1.2.3.253 || > || ed1 || > ++------o------++ > | > | > ++-------o-------++ > || NE 2000 || > || 1.2.3.36 || > || ed1 || > |+---------------+| > | | > | ISPA +-------+ Telco-wire > | Router | ISDN o------------o ISP 1.2.3.x > | +-------+ net > | | > ++---------------++ >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.961031202046.3907R-100000>