Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 11:33:05 -0800 (PST) From: "W. J. Williams" <will@willardjwilliams.com> To: wmoran@potentialtech.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: five networks Message-ID: <20030315193305.97408.qmail@web13506.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <3E734435.8090401@potentialtech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bill Moran, New people to this stuff are very fortunate to have people like you lend their expertise...especially to point out what we do and don't understand...the rest of you newbies out there, this guy is aces. Bill, please learn not to slam, but to help. Will --- Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com> wrote: > W. J. Williams wrote: > > why isn`t this working: > > > > 1. I would like to configure a separate network on five freebsd boxes. > > > > 192.168.0 > > 192.168.1 > > 192.168.2 > > 192.168.3 > > 192.168.4 > > > > > > 2. My DSL router has network 192.168.0, I also have one of my fbsd > boxes > > in this network (192.168.0.2) > > > > 3. I can add the other machines to the 192.168.0 network, no problem, > > using default router 192.168.0.1, broadcast 255.255.255.0, > > > > 4. I tried to configure 192.168.2.1 on one box, using > > gateway_enable="YES", router_enable="YES", > > defaultrouter=192.168.2.1....doesnt work. > > > > what am i doing wrong in getting this box up and running? > > You don't understand routing. > If you ifconfig a box to be 192.168.2.1/24 and then set the default > router > to be 192.168.2.1: the machine sends all traffic not destined for > 192.168.2.0/24 to itself to be routed. However, it didn't know how > to route the traffic the first time, thus it isn't going to work the > second time either. One good rule to remember is that a default gateway > should always be a different machine, and one that has _more_ routing > capability that the one you're configuring. > If I understand your description correctly, the default gateway should > be 192.168.0.1 for all these machines. > I can only assume that you're configuring the system in such a manner > for experimental purposes, as I can see no reason for such a > configuration > in practice. > You leave netmasks off in your description, but I'm assuming that you're > using /24 for everything. This means you'll have to put static routes > in > each machine to allow them to get to 192.168.0.1, as they'll have no way > to automatically reach that machine. The default router will also need > routes manually configured in order to be able to communicate back to > them > (unless it's running some sort of route discovery program). > > If you're not configuring the network like this for experimental > reasons, > then you're configuring it very poorly. A small network like you > describe should have all the machines on the same subnet: 192.168.0.2, > 192.168.0.3, 192.168.0.4, etc > > -- > Bill Moran > Potential Technologies > http://www.potentialtech.com > ===== Will Williams To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030315193305.97408.qmail>