From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 13 13:47:20 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58C4516A4CE for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:47:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpout.mac.com (smtpout.mac.com [17.250.248.87]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A4FD43D1F for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:47:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from justin@mac.com) Received: from mac.com (smtpin07-en2 [10.13.10.152]) by smtpout.mac.com (Xserve/MantshX 2.0) with ESMTP id i2DL66Yx019413 for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:06:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from mac.com (c-24-6-87-110.client.comcast.net [24.6.87.110]) (authenticated bits=0) by mac.com (Xserve/smtpin07/MantshX 3.0) with ESMTP id i2DL657k016589 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:06:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 13:06:04 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v553) From: Justin Walker To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <3D08F840-7532-11D8-8D02-00306544D642@mac.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.553) Subject: Re: One IP used on more than one interface (gif0 and lo0) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 21:47:20 -0000 On Tuesday, March 9, 2004, at 10:10 AM, Julian Elischer wrote: > > > On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Justin Walker wrote: > >> >> On Tuesday, March 9, 2004, at 01:55 AM, Frrodo Baggins wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> What happens if we configure an alias on lo0: >>> >>> ifconfig lo0 alias 192.168.5.1 netmask 255.255.255.0 >>> >>> and then use the same IP on gif0: >> >> What happens if you have the same address on two different houses on >> the same street? > > > that isn't the question.. > it's > "why have different numbers on houses on differnt streets?" > > It is in fact common practice to number all your P2P links using teh > address of one of your broadcast interfaces.. > > this works well, saves you an address and you have a simpler routing > table. > > Point to point links route using the REMOTE address and don't care > about > teh local address so this always works. Thanks for pointing this out; I got caught in the "all the world's an ethernet" trap, and overdid it. Cheers, Justin -- Justin C. Walker, Curmudgeon-At-Large * Institute for General Semantics | It's not whether you win or lose... | It's whether *I* win or lose. *--------------------------------------*-------------------------------*