Re: multiple interfaces on same subnet?
- From: "Atom Powers" <atom.powers@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 20:02:57 -0700
On 8/1/06, Malcolm Kay <malcolm.kay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I have no personal experience of doing this, but it seems to me
you should be able to achieve your objective by using a specific
netmask with ifconfig rather than the CIDR / notation:
172.20.0.1/16 -> 172.20.0.1 netmask 255.255.0.1
172.20.0.2/16 -> 172.20.0.1 netmask 255.255.0.1
Creative idea ... even if it's breaking the rules ( so don't do it ).
Even if FreeBSD honors these subnets there is no guarantee that any
other hosts on the network will. Many systems will refuse to even
configure this kind of invalid subnet.
Plus, you can't easily scale this to the 10 networks the original
poster mentioned and it would be a nightmare to try and figure out how
to re-route traffic if one of the next-hop hosts died. (Which was also
a goal mentioned in the original post.)
Although I've head that IPFW can handle multiple dynamic redirects ( I
forswore all other firewalls as soon as I found pf ) you can do it
very simply with pf.
--
--
Perfection is just a word I use occasionally with mustard.
--Atom Powers--
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- References:
- Re: multiple interfaces on same subnet?
- From: Malcolm Kay
- Re: multiple interfaces on same subnet?
- Prev by Date: Re: SATA Cables Suck!
- Next by Date: Need Advice for Tuning NFS to place nice with a Netapp
- Previous by thread: Re: multiple interfaces on same subnet?
- Next by thread: piperd in top
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
