From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Oct 29 08:39:51 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA13961 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:39:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from pau-amma.whistle.com (s205m64.whistle.com [207.76.205.64]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA13956 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:39:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dhw@whistle.com) Received: (from dhw@localhost) by pau-amma.whistle.com (8.8.8/8.8.7) id IAA17377; Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:38:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dhw) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 08:38:36 -0800 (PST) From: David Wolfskill Message-Id: <199810291638.IAA17377@pau-amma.whistle.com> To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, neilson@www.nugate.com Subject: Re: route to host on directly attached network Cc: neilson@nugate.com In-Reply-To: Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG >Date: Wed, 28 Oct 98 19:11:00 PST >From: "D. Alex Neilson" >Route problem: Tell host 10.10.10.10 that host 10.10.11.11 > is directly reachable via interface vx1 >If 10.10.11.11 has ethernet address 04:20:38:af:eb:4c, it'd be >kewl if this would work > route add -host 10.10.11.11 04:20:38:af:eb:4c -interface vx1 >but of course it doesn't. Can I avoid ifconfig-ing a 10.10.11.0-net >address into 10.10.10.10 to make it work? Sure; just use a netmask that is appropriate for the actual network configuration. In the case you describe, if 10.10.11.11 is, in fact "directly reachable via" an interface with an IP address of 10.10.10.10, it would seem that a netmask of 255.255.0.0 (or bigger, such as 255.0.0.0) is appropriate for the network in question. david -- David Wolfskill UNIX System Administrator dhw@whistle.com voice: (650) 577-7158 pager: (650) 371-4621 `v To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message