[plug] Suse 9.2 2 nics

[Bernd Felsche]

Craig Ringer <craig at postnewspapers.com.au> writes:
>On Fri, 2005-06-24 at 18:53 +0800, Bernd Felsche wrote:

>> If you want it to work "like a switch" with only one computer
>> connected to at least one of the nics, then create a smaller subnet
>> for that nic.

>IMO if you want it to work like a switch, just bridge the interfaces.
>Much cleaner.

I don't see the option in the SuSE easy-peasy network configuration.
That's one reason not to offer it as a solution.

>> e.g. change eth1 to 192.168.1.1 netmask 255.255.255.254

Yeah... I probably goofed. Been up and working far, far too long. At
the time of posting the reply; about 14 hours.

>That netmask specifies a 31 bit subnetwork. That's not a legal network,
>because you must have a network address and broadcast address. It might
>work, but it might not too - just what we all love in our networks - and
>it's generally just a really bad idea. Use at minimum 255.255.255.252
>(ie a 30 bit subnet mask).

That's odd. My ppp connection has Mask:255.255.255.255 :-)

>I still think bridging them is a much better idea.

I could well be for _you_.

>> with its
>> gateway set to 192.168.1.1. Set IP-forwarding on sweat. It will then
>> act as a router between interfaces.

>Yep. You can just use whole 24 bit subnets of 192.168.0.0/16 though, and
>that's likely to be much less confusing to folks relatively new to IP.
>As you can see, funny business with subnets is easy to get wrong - but
>most people "know" the 192.168.x.0/24 subnets even if they don't
>actually understand why they work out that way.

Monkey see...
-- 
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | I'm a .signature virus!
 X   against HTML mail     | Copy me into your ~/.signature
/ \  and postings          | to help me spread!