From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 16 23:22:13 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A50E6A4; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 23:22:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dnebdal@gmail.com) Received: from mail-la0-x22d.google.com (mail-la0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22d]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 538D1880; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 23:22:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-la0-f45.google.com with SMTP id er20so4959597lab.32 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 16:22:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=pU8E3wP9LoyIq57CxjNQZ3QYfBFHBQx3W4TKdqUyw/g=; b=BV9gB/H8rqs9dmtBMGZ9cqVh7PS7G1Jorv66F7/whRUT6HOJWUiVEztU6gGl7WRxOc ugWE63AsPQPgfEpV6acs10LiC7rtS/UDxQWI7oXduFMCp59lkrqt25E/kNaQWFA41Pdx 6s8hIP7NFYbVGsP44IWYKe+sMLGBmHywV15yJTRCL8+BBemOvUXYEqL3zP18bx/USzmL TgLohtpL7+GfaGcBL6aAbLuRwLHi9yrL2ySMay2dWFGNWG2IsElZF/BkxU8xEWCHyOnS sYvZS1EkKeRAUEJzmB88ulpg+PNBH0uQopkxlJUJNQbjwZMZsCkqzerW5pS+UywVNZ9L zzlw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.123.34 with SMTP id lx2mr9972313lab.52.1363476131158; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 16:22:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.80.133 with HTTP; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 16:22:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130316160054.GB52706@in-addr.com> References: <20130316160054.GB52706@in-addr.com> Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2013 00:22:11 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: multi-homing in freebsd From: Daniel Nebdal To: Gary Palmer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Zaphod Beeblebrox , Yasir hussan , Current X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 23:22:13 -0000 On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Gary Palmer wrote: > On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 01:29:27PM +0100, Daniel Nebdal wrote: >> Going by Zaphod's recommendation of using a /32 for each IP, how about this? >> >> ifconfig arge0 inet 192.168.1.100/32 >> ifconfig arge0 alias 192.169.1.100/32 >> >> I wouldn't recommend 192.169, though - only 192.168.x.x is reserved >> for private networks, and 192.169 is a valid IP-routable prefix, >> assigned to some US company. >> To be exact: The ranges from RFC1918 are 10.0.0.0/8, 172.16.0.0 /20 >> and 192.168.0.0/24. > > I think you mean the RFC1918 ranges are > > 10.0.0.0/8 (aka 10.0.0.0 through 10.255.255.255) > 172.16.0.0/12 (aka 172.16.0.0 through 172.31.255.255) > 192.168.0.0/16 (aka 192.168.0.0 through 192.168.255.255) > > Regards, > > Gary Uhm, yes. I can't have been entirely awake when I wrote that.