From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Mar 7 21:12:56 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from scatcat.fhsu.edu (scatcat.fhsu.edu [198.248.127.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E8D137BE9F for ; Tue, 7 Mar 2000 21:12:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from f236@scatcat.fhsu.edu) Received: from tigger.cheerhouse.net (j107.fhsu.edu [198.248.111.107]) by scatcat.fhsu.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) with SMTP id XAA08789 for ; Tue, 7 Mar 2000 23:12:51 -0600 (CST) From: Andrew Fleming To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Alias 2 IPs on same network Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:12:49 -0600 Message-ID: <8mnbcs4df8ol92vtdh2o6ms54e6r6216am@4ax.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.7/32.534 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I am trying to set up two IP address on the same interface. The addresses are x.x.x.1, and x.x.x.2 . I have no problem setting up the aliase, however I can not ping x.x.x.2 from the machine. From outside the machine the seconds address is fine. Now what I have seen is posts is that since the second address is in the same network, I will have to use a netmask of 0xffffffff. This works, however if I simple add a route to the second address using route add x.x.x.2 127.0.0.1 it works fine also. So which way is better. It seems like using 0xffffffff would cause traffic from the x.x.x.2 to be sent to the router, even if it does not need to. Leaving the netmask set right, and adding a route to x.x.x.2 seems like it would be better. Does anyone have any comments on which way is better, why, and if there will be any problems with one or the other. Andrew Fleming f236@scatcat.fhsu.edu To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message