Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 15:29:44 -0400 (EDT) From: "Crist J. Clark" <cjc@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com> To: klui@cup.hp.com (Ken Lui) Cc: cjclark@home.com, klui@cup.hp.com, dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu, questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Question about arp entry in /var/log/messages Message-ID: <199906041929.PAA03755@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com> In-Reply-To: <199906041703.KAA15511@cup44ux.cup.hp.com> from Ken Lui at "Jun 4, 99 10:03:22 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ken Lui wrote,
> >From cjc@cc942873-a.ewndsr1.nj.home.com Fri Jun 4 07:57:41 PDT 1999
> > Note the loopback addresses for the machine's own interfaces. Also note
> > the broadcast addresses... *shrug* dunno where yours are.
>
> I will try to dig up why the broadcast addresses aren't there.
It's probably just that you had not tried to use them yet. I have
Samba running and since that NetBIOS stuff is always shouting in
broadcasts, mine are always in the table.
> > Whoa. Did you just say ed1 and ed2 are on the same wire? You _will_
> > have trouble if two interfaces on one machine share a wire. There is
> > no really good reason I am aware of to ever have that situation.
>
> I had posed this question towards the beginning of this thread. In
> particular, I was wondering if I need to have different wires for
> my 2 networks. The impression I got was a lot of people have my
> current physical setup. But since you're saying you shouldn't have
> the same wire going from ed1 and ed2 (in my case), and if I switch to
> 10bT for my network rather than 10b2 (mostly), would I need 2 hubs?
You lost me.
> Crist, I'm curious about the physical layout of your network. Can
> you give me a simplified view of it?
Which one? The netstat -rn I showed you? It's nothing much; I just
have a 192.168.0 net in my office (but I do admin the network for our
building). I have a CAT5 cable coming out of my wall that is hooked
into my PC at fxp0 (aaa.bbb.ccc.204) and the other end is the
aaa.bbb.ccc/24 net. I have a second fxp1 NIC with BNC cable that goes
around to whatever machines I have scavenged into my office at the
time. It is a 192.168.0/24 net. My PC has NATd running and also does
DNS for the 192.168.0 net. Want a picture?
aaa.bbb.ccc/24 }__100BaseTX__|aaa.bbb.ccc.204|_[ My ]_
LAN } | fxp0 | [ PC ] |
|
192.168.0/24}__10Base2__|192.168.0.1|__|
LAN } | fxp1 |
> Here is my current layout from
> my old message in case you didn't catch it:
>
> [isdn]
> |___10bT___[hub] ("wire 0")
> |___10b2___[Mac]___10b2___[FreeBSD w/ 2 ethernet cards]
> ("wire 1")-> |
> |___10b2___[NeXT]___10b2___[NeXT]
We seem to have different definitions of 'a wire.' Remember that
Ethernet is a broadcast protocol. From what I see, this diagram only
has _one_ wire. That is, a packet sent out by, say, a NeXT box, will be
seen by _every_ other machine in the picture. When you have several
cables connected into a hub, as far as I am concerned, they are all
one 'wire' since each machine on each cable can talk to any other via
Ethernet.
> I was thinking of needing a setup like this:
>
> [isdn]
> |___10bT___[hub] ("wire 0")
> |___10b2___[FreeBSD ethernet card 1] (net 15--ed1--"wire 1")
> [FreeBSD ethernet card 2] (net 10--ed2--"wire 2")
> |___10b2___[Mac]___10b2___[NeXT]___10b2___[NeXT]
I do not really understand this picture. First, your hub seems useless
now. It's just converting from CAT5 to BNC? But more important, you do
not seem to have any hosts on the 15-net. What is your motivation for
doing this? (I'm too lazy to go back and dig out the old stuff. ;) You
above mentioned moving to a new media, 10BaseT, but there is no such
change in this picture.
--
Crist J. Clark cjclark@home.com
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906041929.PAA03755>