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
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig6AA979154D3FFBF7E712CC2E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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= =2E > ... >> Is this kind of setup even supported? >=20 > 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=20 multiple physical and vlan interfaces, shouldn't a (for example) server=20 bound to one of the existing physical interfaces be able to communicate=20 with machine2, provided that both machines know how to route packets to=20 each other over the vlan interface without IP address? --------------enig6AA979154D3FFBF7E712CC2E Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----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----- --------------enig6AA979154D3FFBF7E712CC2E--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f4tr7c$9qf$1>