Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 12:55:40 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: VLANs and routing Message-ID: <f4tr7c$9qf$1@sea.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <20070615104329.GF1173@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <f4q05k$f68$1@sea.gmane.org> <20070615104329.GF1173@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] Peter Jeremy wrote: > On 2007-Jun-14 01:55:20 +0200, Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> wrote: >> But the (somewhat weird) requirements are that the vlan interface on >> machine1 shouldn't have assigned IP address, but the second one should. > ... >> Is this kind of setup even supported? > > I don't see how it could be if machine1 is an IP endpoint: In order > to transmit a packet, it needs to put a source IP address into the > packet - which virtually always comes from the interface. Yes, I'm wondering about the "almost always" case. Since machine1 has multiple physical and vlan interfaces, shouldn't a (for example) server bound to one of the existing physical interfaces be able to communicate with machine2, provided that both machines know how to route packets to each other over the vlan interface without IP address? [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGcnAsldnAQVacBcgRAh9CAJ9XOBdL3PgakvwQHIUt8yW5UdkaOwCg+jg9 dOI5mLS5KWYcHumovjfwNoM= =tRUm -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f4tr7c$9qf$1>