From owner-freebsd-isp Wed May 9 7:37:40 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from post.xecu.net (post.xecu.net [216.127.136.211]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2662037B423 for ; Wed, 9 May 2001 07:37:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from andy@xecu.net) Received: from shell.xecu.net (www.mip.net [216.127.136.221]) by post.xecu.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E14E1496B; Wed, 9 May 2001 10:37:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (andy@localhost) by shell.xecu.net (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA07803; Wed, 9 May 2001 10:37:25 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: shell.xecu.net: andy owned process doing -bs Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 10:37:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Andy Dills To: Jan Knepper Cc: Subject: Re: Two net blocks on one interface. In-Reply-To: <3AF9507D.9030409@digitaldaemon.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 9 May 2001, Jan Knepper wrote: > Hi, > > I've come to the great (may be not so) situation where I have two > netblocks on one interface. > Something like: > 163.105.9.32/27 > and > 165.204.18.128/25 > > The first of the two has worked just fine for a long time. > > The network of the second net block seems to be problematic though. > The IP's are visible on the machine itself, but there does not seem to > be any traffic within the second net block. > > Any ideas? Could you qualify that a little more? I'm not sure what you mean "there does not seem to be any traffic". Are you trying to route between the two? Andy xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Andy Dills 301-682-9972 Xecunet, LLC www.xecu.net xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Dialup * Webhosting * E-Commerce * High-Speed Access To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message