Re: [SLUG] Routing across ethernet and ppp?

[michaelf@nospam.mafnet.com]

Connecting machine 3 the way you have on the same hub with those settings is a 
bad bad bad idea..

I am sure plenty will point out why.. but I don't have time to go into detail 
just right now

Quoting erich <erich@nospam.emseng.com.au>:

> 
> > Without knowing your subnet masking {but assuming a standard class C
> mask
> > of 255.255.255.0}, you have a single machine with two IP addresses on
> the
> > same subnet but different interfaces. From memory, this will
> completely
> > screw routing. The box won't know which interface to throw packets for
> the
> > subnet out on.
> 
> I then have a question, could the following setup work? ( I am not
> syaing it is the best) 
> 
> Machine 1: internet gateway
> 	PPP0:  	139.x.x.x, 	netmask ?
> 	eth0:	203.x.x.1	netmask 255.255.255.0
> default route GW = 139.x.x.x ppp0
> route add net 192.168.0.0 eht0
> route add net 203.x.x.0 eht0
> 
> which gets connected to the local hub. 
> 
> On the same hub:
> 
> Machine 2: NT box with web server
> 	eth0:	203.x.x.2	netmask 255.255.255.0
> 	dafault route GW=139.x.x.x eth0
> I don't know how to add routes to NT Machines
> 
> Machine 3 and more on the same hub but with private addresses
> 	eth0:	192.168.0.1 	netmask 255.255.255.0
> route add net 203.x.x.0 eht0
> default route GW = 139.x.x.x eth0
> 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Erich
> --
> SLUG - Sydney Linux Users Group Mailing List - http://www.slug.org.au
> To unsubscribe send email to slug-request@nospam.slug.org.au with
> unsubscribe in the text
> 


-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: wm.mafnet.com
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux Users Group Mailing List - http://www.slug.org.au
To unsubscribe send email to slug-request@nospam.slug.org.au with
unsubscribe in the text