On Fri, 22 Jun 2001 10:55:41 +0200 (CEST), M.F. PSIkappa wrote: >> > No, it's incorrect, unnumberd allow you to connect 2 router without IP >> > adresses. >> > >> > 192.168.0.1/24 [cisco]unnumbered-----unnumberd[cisco] 192.168.2.1/24 >> > >> > It's special case of point-to-point connection. In linux if I make >> > point-to-point connection I have to assign any IP on both endpoint of >> > connection. >> >> What is the difference with >> >> 192.168.0.1/24 [linux] 192.168.0.1 ------- 192.168.2.1 [linux] 192.168.2.1/24 >> >> if I may be so bold to ask? Yes, the routing effects may be different, and I >> mentioned that might be a problem, but the unnumbered thing looks like a >> cisco-specific hack... > >Difference is in traceroute. Unnumbered is invisible, if I assign IP I see >it in traceroute, but I can make hack that make this connection invisible, >but it's rfc break ... This is correct, in the workings... But I don't think it really breaks the RFC's... Anyways this is the diffrence: All networks prefixed with "10.0"... Numbered: ----- 10.0.1.1/24 [[[Linux Box]]] 10.0.0.100/24 -----Ethernet----- 10.0.2.1/24 [[[Linux Box]]] 10.0.0.200/24 ----- Unnumbered: ----- 10.0.1.1/24 [[[Linux Box]]] -----P to P----- [[[Linux Box]]] 10.0.0.200/24 ----- As you can see, the unnumbered is a Point to Point connection, and acts more like a "bridge"... Actually, if you want to do an Unnumbered connection with two Ethernet Interfaces, thats exactly how I would set it up... as a Bridge. Either that or use PPPoE and that should be able to do something simular. >Yes, it's cisco specific hack. No this is not true... Alot of the Point to Point (IE: Dial-Up, ISDN) type Internet Connections use Unnumbered Connections. There are a large number of companies that support these type of connections. --Greg. ------------------------------------- Greg Varga Owner: Digital Realities http://www.digital.realities.com 604.576.2219 Lead Programmer of MUTAG http://www.bvcompuworks.com/mutag Network Administrator -------------------------------------
