From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 21 16:46:22 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE25816A417; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 16:46:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tom@tomjudge.com) Received: from s200aog17.obsmtp.com (s200aog17.obsmtp.com [207.126.144.131]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CE70C13C458; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 16:46:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tom@tomjudge.com) Received: from source ([217.206.187.80]) by eu1sys200aob017.postini.com ([207.126.147.11]) with SMTP; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 16:46:15 UTC Received: from bill.mintel.co.uk (bill.mintel.co.uk [10.0.0.89]) by rodney.mintel.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTP id F216A18141B; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 16:46:14 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <4794CC56.2030802@tomjudge.com> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 16:46:14 +0000 From: Tom Judge User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071022) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Bruce M. Simpson" References: <001b01c85c0f$6ca051d0$1e01c80a@John> <4794703A.4020801@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4794703A.4020801@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Enovation Technologies Subject: Re: help X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 16:46:22 -0000 Bruce M. Simpson wrote: > Enovation Technologies wrote: >> i configure with sysinstall my second nic , but when i restart my box >> i have this message >> arp: 10.200.1.1 is on re0 but got reply from 00:50:7f:b0:a0:f8 on re1 >> >> >> my question is how to configure 2 nics with different ip on same box >> in the same subnet. >> > > Configure the second with a /32 prefix (netmask 255.255.255.255) instead > of the usual netmask. > > You will always receive the arp warning unless you disable it by setting > sysctl > net.link.ether.inet.log_arp_wrong_iface and > net.link.ether.inet.log_arp_movements to 0. > > These limitations *may* go away in future releases. > Surely this configuration will cause all the reply's to be routed out of re0 without some form of pfil layer manipulation? Tom