Larry Brown 提到: > Why do you have a wireless connection to the same device you have a > wired connection to? You should be able to have wireless devices > connect to your "Wireless AP Router" which should provide an IP address > to the wireless device on the 172.20.1.0 network. >>_________eth0 172.20.1.30 _______________ >>|#1 PC |-----------------> |Wireless AP | >>|Linux | |Router |->ADSL->Internet >>|Http |eth1 172.20.1.31 |172.20.1.254 | >>|Server |...wireless......> |_____________| >>|_______| ^ >> | >>__________ | >>|#2 PC | | >>|Windows |NIC 172.20.1.32 | >>|Http |-----------------------| >>|client | >>|________| >> Yeah, it may sound redundant, but it could happen in my case. My Linux box is an embeded IP camera with Http server built-in so clinet PC #2 can use brower with IP address (172.20.1.30/31)to access it. At very first time, users need to use wired ethernet to configure IP Cam's wireless setting (SSID,WEP, etc) to make wireless connection work. At this time, two interfaces in the same subnet exists. Then users might just unplug ethernet and put IP camera on the wall without ethernet cable. But now Linux box's route table still have (eth0 wired) for same subnet, so traffic won't go thru wireless eth1 unless wired eth0 is brought down or have subnet changed to make traffic pass thru wireless eth1. Otherwise, users might think wireless eth1 function doesn't work at all. thanks, AL -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
