Claude Jones wrote:
On Sun April 13 2008, Mikkel L. Ellertson wrote:
The route-<interface-name> file contains the data that is used by
the interface activation script to add routes specific to that
interface. Although strikingly accurate, You can think of the file
running the route add command with the information provided in the
file passed to the route command. I have not checked to see if it is
still true, but the file used to accept routes in 2 formats - the
one you show, and form used by the route command.
You either have to create the file by hand, or use one of the
network setup GUIs to create it.
well, this issue was settled in an "interesting" way.
trying to mimic what the Debian user had figured out was looking more and more
like a poop in a punch bowl
my boss figured out a different way to do the same thing, but, you may be
surprised
he told me to configure my 70.###.###.124 address in the following manner:
we gave it a subnet of /24 even though our block of 64 IP's has a subnet
of .192; though our address range starts at .64 we told it that its gateway
was .1 -- somehow, the Cisco router is smart enough to figure this all out
and get our traffic onto the net, don't ask me how ---
Do I understand correctly that you took a Class A ip address and gave it
a class C subnet mask? Ummm is that not a huge waste of IP addresses? or
am i reading that wrong?
Max
Max
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
