From owner-freebsd-isp  Fri Jan 23 08:32:28 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA16061
          for freebsd-isp-outgoing; Fri, 23 Jan 1998 08:32:28 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from nak.myhouse.com (nak.myhouse.com [209.70.45.162])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA16045
          for <isp@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 23 Jan 1998 08:32:21 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from zoonie@myhouse.com)
Received: from localhost (zoonie@localhost)
	by nak.myhouse.com (8.8.8/8.8.7) with SMTP id LAA02674;
	Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:27:15 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from zoonie@myhouse.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: nak.myhouse.com: zoonie owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 11:27:14 -0500 (EST)
From: zoonie <zoonie@myhouse.com>
To: eculp <eculp@ver1.telmex.net.mx>
cc: Karl Pielorz <kpielorz@tdx.co.uk>, isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: IP address aliases...
In-Reply-To: <34C89C97.15FB7483@ver1.telmex.net.mx>
Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.3.96.980123112626.2333G-100000@nak.myhouse.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

i do the same thing also but i use the host mask (255.255.255.255) and it
works ok for me but i do get occasional ARP error messages in my system
log.....

On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, eculp wrote:

> Karl Pielorz wrote:
> > 
> > A while ago I asked about this subject - and was correctly told that secondary
> > / additional addresses bound to an interface under FreeBSD (I'm using 2.2.2 &
> > 2.2.5) have to have a netmask of 0xffffffff (255.255.255.255).
> > 
> > What happens if I have to do the following:
> > 
> > ep0: 192.168.100.1 netmask 255.255.255.242
> > 
> > then I want to add:
> > 
> > ep0: 10.10.2.1 netmask 255.255.255.252  ***** alias
> 
> I use 
> # ifconfig ep0 inet 10.10.2.1 netmask 255.255.255.252 alias
> It's worked fine for me since one of my ethernet cards
> died about three months ago :-) two networks on the same 
> cable, same card, I still haven't bought another card :-)
> 
> provecho
> 
> ed
> > 
> > (above are obviously fake addresses)
> > 
> > Do I still have to munge the netmask on the second address to 255.255.255.255?
> > - or is this a 'different' case as the 2 IP numbers are in fact on completely
> > different networks? (i.e. not adding a 2nd IP address on the same network as
> > the first)?
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Karl Pielorz
>