On Tue, September 4, 2012 16:51, Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> That should happen directly without C's involvement if the netmask is
> 255.255.0.0 on A and B's eth1 interfaces.
It is not. The netmask on those interfaces is 255.255.255.0.
>
>> Instead it goes to Eth0 on C where it dies as one would
>> expect.
>
> Why does C have both internet and LAN addresses on the same
> interfaces?
>
I am experimenting to see if this arrangement is workable. I want to
know if it is possible to have two separate 192.168.x subnets on the
same network. Why? I do not have a purpose in mind. I am just
checking out whether it can work or not.
If it is impossible then then I will discover why that is so, which I
think will be useful in itself.
--
*** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel ***
James B. Byrne mailto:ByrneJB@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca
9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241
Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757
Canada L8E 3C3
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
