Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2000 20:07:06 -0800 From: "Barry Edwin" <archiver@db.geocrawler.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Networking help... Message-ID: <200002220407.UAA23873@www.geocrawler.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This message was sent from Geocrawler.com by "Barry Edwin" <buttonhol@hotmail.com>
Be sure to reply to that address.
Hi all. I'm a little unsure about the nitty-
grittys of networking and need some advice.
I need a small network to look like this:
(don't ask why)
/----------- /---------------
| comp 1 | 10.0.0 | comp 2 |
| (win98) |<--------->| (FreeBSD) |<-----
| 10.10.0.2 | xl0 | xl0: 10.0.0.1 | xl1 |
-----------/ | xl1: 10.0.1.1 | |
---------------/ |
|
/------------- |
| computer 2 | /----- 10.0.1 |
| (win98) |<---------- | hub |<-----------
| 10.0.1.2 | -----/
-------------/ ^
|
/------------- |
| computer 3 | |
| (win98) |<---------------
| 10.0.1.3 |
-------------/
1. I'm assuming that the above IP address
configuration above looks good.
2. I tried to make all three clients in the same
subnetwork. However, when I did:
'ifconfig xl0 inet 10.0.0.1'
'ifconfig xl1 inet 10.0.0.2'
To the FreeBSD box, the routing table would
not show Link#2:
Destination Gateway ...
127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 ...
10.0 Link#1 ...
Only when I configured xl0 and xl1 on two
different subnets, like my diagram, did I see
Link#2.
Destination Gateway ...
127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1
10.0 Link#1
10.0.1 Link#2
Why is this? Is it possible to have both nics
in a duel homed box be a part of the same
subnet? If not, why? If so, how?
3. Is it better to use static routes in such a
small network or use routed?
4. I want Computer 2 to be able to ping 10.0.1.1,
to be able to ping 10.0.0.1,
and to be able to ping 10.0.0.2.
What configuration settings do I need in
FreeBSD?
Here's what I have in rc.conf:
gateway_enable="YES" (I assume this allows
traffic from xl0 to xl1)
ifconfig_lo0="inet 127.0.0.1 netmask
255.255.255.0"
ifconfig_xl0="inet 192.168.0.1 netmask
255.255.255.0"
ifconfig_xl1="inet 192.168.1.1 netmask
255.255.255.0"
Now adding the static routes, I did the
following:
'route add 10.0.0.1 -interface xl0'
'route add 10.0.0.2 10.0.0.1'
'route add 10.0.1.1 -interface xl1'
'route add 10.0.1.2 10.0.1.1'
'route add 10.0.1.3 10.0.1.2'
Here is what the routing table according to
'netstat -r' said:
Destination Gateway ... Netif Expire
127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 ... lo0
10.0 Link#1 ... xl0
10.0.0.1 0:50:4:d8:38:b3 ... lo0
10.0.0.2 10.0.0.1 ... xl0
10.0.1 Link#2 ... xl1
10.0.1.1 0:50:4:d8:37:a1 ... lo0
10.0.1.2 10.0.1.1 ... xl1
10.0.1.3 10.0.1.1 ... xl1
When computer 2 is used to ping 10.0.1.1 (xl1)
I get this message:
'/kernel arplookup 10.0.1.2 failed: host is
not on local network'
on the FreeBSD box.
When computer 2 is used to ping 10.0.0.1 (xl0)
Win98 ping says that the host is unreachable.
Obviously I've made a mistake or left
something out.
Why do I get the arp lookup failure on xl1?
Why is the other subnet 10.0.0 unreachable
by 10.0.1?
Thanks alot.
Geocrawler.com - The Knowledge Archive
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?200002220407.UAA23873>