From owner-freebsd-net  Mon Jul 24 12:51:26 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from snafu.adept.org (adsl-63-201-63-44.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [63.201.63.44])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3A4737BC5C
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:51:21 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from mike@adept.org)
Received: by snafu.adept.org (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 01E709EE01; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:51:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by snafu.adept.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id EE7E39B001; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:51:00 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:51:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mike Hoskins <mike@adept.org>
To: "f.johan.beisser" <jan@caustic.org>
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: true aliased interface?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007241019050.43945-100000@pogo.caustic.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007241248430.24335-100000@snafu.adept.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, f.johan.beisser wrote:

> 	fxp0 flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu=1500
> 	inet 192.168.0.1 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255
> 	fxp0.1 flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu=1500
> 	inet 192.168.0.2 netmask 0xffffffff broadcast 192.168.0.255
> 	etc...

Hmm...  like cisco subifs.  What would this accomplish?  The traffic is
still going over the same physical interface...  so is the subif desire
for cosmetic purposes, or is there some performance aspect in mind?

-mrh



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message