Re: netmask on aliases overriden by netmask on interface

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



Just a cautionary note, if you use snmpd you may start seeing regular "ia_addr insert" errors using this approach depending on your version of snmpd and how reporting is configured.


Leroy Tennison
Network Information/Cyber Security Specialist
E: leroy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
2220 Bush Dr
McKinney, Texas
75070
www.datavoiceint.com
This message has been sent on behalf
of a company that is part of the Harris Operating Group of
Constellation Software Inc. These companies are listed
here
.
If you prefer not to be contacted by Harris
Operating Group
please notify us
.
This message is intended exclusively for the
individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication
may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or
confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are
not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print,
retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you
have received this message in error, please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail and delete all copies of the
message.

________________________________________
From: CentOS <centos-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Ulf Volmer <u.volmer@xxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2019 11:48 AM
To: centos@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re:  netmask on aliases overriden by netmask on interface

On 08.02.19 15:08, James B. Byrne via CentOS wrote:

> # ifconfig eth1:192008001
> eth1:192008001 Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:25:90:61:74:C1
>           inet addr:192.168.8.1  Bcast:192.168.8.255
> Mask:255.255.255.128
>           UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
>           Interrupt:17 Memory:feae0000-feb00000
>
> Which shows that the network mask is determined by the interface mask
> and is not overridden by the alias definition.
>
> Is this expected behaviour?  Does this mean that a particular physical
> interface cannot belong to more than one network, or at least not to
> networks having differing cidr masks?

Interface aliases are evil from my point of view. I recommend to
configure the ip directly to the interface.

#ifcfg-eth2
[...]
IPADDR=192.168.200.1
NETMASK=255.255.255.0
IPADDR2=192.168.201.1
NETMASK2=255.255.255.192

ip addr show dev eth2
4: eth2: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast
state UP qlen 1000
    link/ether 08:00:27:b0:c5:7c brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
    inet 192.168.200.1/24 brd 192.168.200.255 scope global eth2
    inet 192.168.201.1/26 brd 192.168.201.63 scope global eth2
    inet6 fe80::a00:27ff:feb0:c57c/64 scope link
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

Best regards
Ulf
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos



[Index of Archives]     [CentOS]     [CentOS Announce]     [CentOS Development]     [CentOS ARM Devel]     [CentOS Docs]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Carrier Grade Linux]     [Linux Media]     [Asterisk]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Xorg]     [Linux USB]


  Powered by Linux