Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 14 Apr 1995 11:56:36 -0700 (PDT)
From:      julian@TFS.COM (Julian Elischer)
To:        joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de
Cc:        jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, hackers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Routing nightmares.
Message-ID:  <m0rzqXk-0003wjC@TFS.COM>
In-Reply-To: <199504140914.LAA17784@uriah.heep.sax.de> from "J Wunsch" at Apr 14, 95 11:14:02 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 
> As Joe Greco wrote:
> > 
> > daneel# ifconfig ed0    
> > ed0: flags=8863<UP,BROADCAST,NOTRAILERS,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
> > 	inet 151.186.28.254 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 151.186.28.255
> > daneel# ifconfig ed1
> > ed1: flags=8863<UP,BROADCAST,NOTRAILERS,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
> > 	inet 151.186.20.196 netmask 0xffff0000 broadcast 151.186.255.255
> 
> I'm not an INET expert, but ``common wisdom'' says you will have to
> use the same subnet mask throughout the whole net.
> 
This is definitly the experience I have had......
it is UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY BROKEN!!!!!
it may be that some of the NEWER revisions of the routing control protocols
may fix this (MAYBE).. but I wouldn't count on it..
anyway teh problem is outside your little enclave and
in the wider world..

(bad news I'm afraid....
(though you could see if you can broadcast proxy-arp
messages for all your internal nodes and 'attract'
all packets for them to your gateway :)

julian



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m0rzqXk-0003wjC>