[2686] in RedHat Linux List
Re: redhat-digest Digest V96 #445 (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mauricio Pineda)
Tue Nov 5 00:15:56 1996
From: "Mauricio Pineda" <thrill@destiny.org>
To: <redhat-digest@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 1996 16:59:24 -0800
Resent-From: redhat-list@redhat.com
Reply-To: redhat-list@redhat.com
> redhat@apci.net writes:
> >
> > I have two ethernet interfaces, eth0 and eth1. The kernel probes and
> > finds eth0, and the append line in my lilo.conf successfully makes the
> > kernel probe and find eth1. Piece of cake so far...
> >
> > Let's say eth0 has address x.x.x.3 in a class C network with a default
> > gateway of x.x.x.1. I've got this configured and it works just great.
> >
> > Now, let's say eth1 has address y.y.y.1 in a different class C
network,
> > and it is to be the default gateway for other hosts in y.y.y.0. By
the
> > way, y.y.y.0 is a valid network on the Internet which need to be
> > reachable by the global Internet, so I don't want proxying or
> > masquarading. How do I make this work?
> I have exactly this setup, and I never got the routing to work properly
> with any of the options about IP forwarding and/or gatewaying enabled or
> disabled. The last time I tried to fix this was with 1.3.x kernels. If
> anyone has a working setup with two ethernet cards in the same box
> routing to two different networks, I would like to know exactly how it
> is set up, too.
>
> However, in my case I found another solution. One net is small (three
> machines). The other net is the internet. I simply set up static routes
> to the hosts on the small net and the main network route to the
> internet. This has worked just fine.
>
> My ISP is down now, so I can't show you the routes and commands. Write
> me by private e-mail if you want these.
I have a setup with two eth's. eth0 is a 100mb lan, and eth1 a 10mb lan. I
have 64 assigned IP's and then a full c class. I got the network running by
splitting the first 64 ip's into two networks. The first network from 0 -
32 is for the 10mb lan, and from 33-63 is for the 100mb lan. The cisco of
course is on the 10mb lan and therefore I had to set up the redhat box to
do the routing for the higher set of IP's. The two 100mb lan routes through
my .33 machine (.32 is the lan for the 100mb), which eventually goes
through the actual router. The key to getting this to work was setting up
the proper netmask, which in my case ended up being 255.255.255.224 (why,
do not ask me cause I had a good friend walk me through it and I didn't ask
why it had to be that way, but I do intend on finding out). My routing
table looks simple enough, where I have the lower network configured for
eth1, and the .32 network configured for eth0, both with netmasks of .224,
the default gateway is still .1, but the 100mb machines are set up with a
default gw of .33 which is the 100mb ip of the redhat box. The ifconfig
statements are also pretty simple, eth0's bcast on .63, and eth1 on .31
(last number of their respective 32 IP's)...
One word of warning though.. Do not expect your router to automatically
detect your two subnets. I had to input the information into my router,
including the netmask for the two subnets.. it did get a bit tricky, but in
all reality, it was easier than I had anticipated (given that I had someone
who I consider near genious walking me through it)..
If any of this makes sense to you, I'm glad I took the time to write it,
cause I am still trying to figure out how it all works! :)
Mauricio Pineda
mp@maxella.com
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
________________________________________________________________________
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-Errata
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-Tips http://www.redhat.com/mailing-lists
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe: mail -s unsubscribe redhat-list-request@redhat.com < /dev/null
