From owner-freebsd-net Fri Oct 8 22:45:35 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from at.dotat.com (zed.dotat.com [203.2.134.254]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EA471586A for ; Fri, 8 Oct 1999 22:45:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from hart@at.dotat.com) Received: from at.dotat.com (localhost.dotat.com [127.0.0.1]) by at.dotat.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA20008; Sat, 9 Oct 1999 15:15:14 +0930 (CST) Message-Id: <199910090545.PAA20008@at.dotat.com> To: Mohit Aron Cc: wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman), freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG, alc@cs.rice.edu (Alan Cox) Subject: Re: arp errors on machines with two interfaces In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 08 Oct 1999 23:16:12 EST." <199910090416.XAA01282@cs.rice.edu> Date: Sat, 09 Oct 1999 15:15:14 +0930 From: Leigh Hart Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi Mohit, Mohit Aron wrote: > > > Yes, don't put two network interfaces on one (logical) wire. > > Brilliant! All machines in our dept are connected by switched > 100Mbps Ethernet - so your suggestion implies that I either > don't put two network interfaces on the machine or don't > connect both to the network. > > The first would mean I cannot saturate the machine anymore in > my experiments, and I'll leave the second to more imaginative > minds than mine. If you require more than 100Mbps of aggregate bandwidth to the network, use FastEtherchannel or use two different (logical) subnets via two different VLANs on your switch. Cheers Leigh -- | "By the time they had diminished | Leigh Hart, hart@dotat.com | | from 50 to 8, the other dwarves | CCNA: http://www.cisco.com | | began to suspect 'Hungry' ..." | PO Box 3057 Newton SA 5074 | | -- Gary Larson, "The Far Side" | http://www.dotat.com/hart/ | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message