Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 12:29:39 -0600 (MDT) From: Nick Rogness <nick@rapidnet.com> To: Andre Albsmeier <andre.albsmeier@mchp.siemens.de> Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: routed: possible netmask problem ... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007141215560.8367-100000@rapidnet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1000714140842.86137C-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Robert Watson wrote: > On Fri, 14 Jul 2000, Nick Rogness wrote: > > > > root@webfix:~>ifconfig fxp0 > > > fxp0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500 > > > inet 192.168.1.3 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255 > > > inet 192.168.1.4 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 192.168.1.4 > > > > you have a /32 netmask on 1.4, change it to a /24 address > > (255.255.255.0) and see if that helps. > > I don't have much experience with routed, but I can tell you that the /32 > here is correct in my experience -- the two addresses are in the same /24 > subnet. Putting both in with a netmask of /24 will cause problems due to > muliple routing entries with the same prefix/netmask. > I don't have much experience with routed either. I do agree in "specific" situations, setting both netmasks to /24 could be a problem. I have used /32 within the same network, but I binded it to the loopback interface and used arp (pub). That might solve your problems. I've also run gated without problems with this type of setup. Nick Rogness - Speak softly and carry a Gigabit switch. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0007141215560.8367-100000>