Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 18:42:26 -0500 From: Robert Hough <rch@solveinteractive.com> To: freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: [mwithers: Re: Routing problem 2 ISA NICs on one machine] Message-ID: <20010203184226.B51545@solveinteractive.com> In-Reply-To: <20010203161125.D21863@arrakis.desert-power.org> References: <20010203160206.B21863@arrakis.desert-power.org> <20010203161125.D21863@arrakis.desert-power.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mark B. Withers [mwithers@one.net] wrote:
> I meant only one loopback address for each interface.
Again, I'm not sure why you would need a seperate loopback for each
interface. This seems 'odd' to me. I think your co-worker is either
A) Pulling your leg
B) a dumb ass, and you should avoid future advice from him.
However, I could easily be the dumb ass in this case. I just don't see
why you would need this.
> I have 2 ISA nics which one would require a loopback address of 127.0.0.1
> while the other would be 127.1.0.1 and if I had a 3rd nic it would be
> 127.2.0.1 and so forth.
No, this not the case. I'm not sure why this person would tell you that you
need additional loopback devices for each physical interface. You don't need
that, here -- I'll show ya.
(ip's removed to protect the innocent)
[rch@hostname:rch] $ ifconfig -a
vx0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 10.0.0.5 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255
ether 00:20:af:f1:3b:1f
de0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 192.168.1.51 netmask 0xfffffff0 broadcast 192.168.1.63
ether 00:00:c0:28:69:db
media: autoselect (10baseT/UTP) status: active
supported media: autoselect 10base5/AUI 10base2/BNC 10baseT/UTP <full-duplex> 10baseT/UTP
lp0: flags=8810<POINTOPOINT,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 16384
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000
The machine above is running ipfw, and has zero problems accessing it's own interfaces
or other IP's on the net. Notice, it only has a single loopback device. Why is that,
because only one is required. :)
If I were you, I'd go smack this co-worker. He sounds like an MCSE...
> I only wondered if anybody had heard of this as to separate each nic
> so that each interface responds independantly when called upon by it's
> ip address.
Each interface should respond individually per their IP address. No, I've never
heard of requiring multiple loopback devices for this.
> As it stands now (with only one loopback (127.0.0.1)) only
> one interface responds even when I am pinging the ip address of the
> second network interface.
Is the second interface enabled? What do you get when you do an ifconfig -a? What does
your current routing table look like (netstat -nr)? Do you have ipfilters setup, and
if so, what is the default policy?
--
Robert Hough (rch@solveinteractive.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?20010203184226.B51545>