> -----Original Message----- > From: redhat-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:redhat-list- > bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of sub@xxxxxxx > Sent: Friday, January 28, 2011 9:00 AM > To: General Red Hat Linux discussion list > Subject: Re: bonding + vlan (without untagged address) > > Le 28/01/2011 14:18, Matty Sarro a écrit : > > Any reason you aren't letting the switch control vlan access? > > Because it's a test server, I will install on this server various OS on various > VLANs and I don't want to change the port configuration on both switches > each time. > > The goal is to make the network configuration on the OS, cloning it, and > having the good (VLAN-ed) network at first boot. > > Nicolas [root@bbapp1 network-scripts]# cat ifcfg-bond0* DEVICE=bond0 BOOTPROTO=static ONBOOT=yes TYPE=Ethernet DEVICE=bond0.10 BOOTPROTO=static IPADDR=158.135.1.21 NETMASK=255.255.254.0 GATEWAY=158.135.0.1 ONBOOT=yes TYPE=Ethernet VLAN=yes DEVICE=bond0.650 BOOTPROTO=static IPADDR=10.220.0.100 NETMASK=255.255.255.0 ONBOOT=yes TYPE=Ethernet VLAN=yes [root@bbapp1 network-scripts]# cat ifcfg-eth* DEVICE=eth0 ONBOOT=yes TYPE=Ethernet MASTER=bond0 SLAVE=yes DEVICE=eth1 ONBOOT=no TYPE=Ethernet MASTER=bond0 SLAVE=yes That's how we have a box set up to tag everything outgoing. I'm really not sure why eth1 is set to onboot=no... I'll have to look into it. -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
