Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 12:47:52 -0400 From: Charles Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sten_Daniel_S=F8rsdal?= <lists@wm-access.no> Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org, aaron.glenn@gmail.com Subject: Re: VLAN interfaces on FreeBSD; performance issues Message-ID: <8A38568B-D5B4-4EE7-AFB5-FF6C0D1285C6@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <4325A383.2030404@wm-access.no> References: <ED8E7F5B-7E3F-40D8-8993-76E9AB8226F9@yfug.yumaed.org> <4322FDC4.8010609@mac.com> <18f601940509110230242e8bfc@mail.gmail.com> <43243677.6020707@mac.com> <43254F76.4000505@wm-access.no> <432579F1.4010807@mac.com> <4325A383.2030404@wm-access.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 12, 2005, at 11:49 AM, Sten Daniel S=F8rsdal wrote: >> The essence of multihoming is having two (or more) distinct NICs. > > so if i had two vlan's with an ip on both. wouldnt this qualify it as > multihoming? would i somehow no longer need to configure the =20 > computer as > though it was a multihomed? I don't fully understand the question you are asking. If you have =20 one physical connection (one NIC, one Cat5 cable), you can only =20 connect to a single collision domain, even if you use VLANs (or set =20 up IP aliases on different subnets, etc). --=20 -Chuck=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8A38568B-D5B4-4EE7-AFB5-FF6C0D1285C6>