>To make sure I understand the whole picture, as it appears close... The >camera is directly connected to what is running Linux and the object >running linux would be mounted up on the wall along with the camera? If >that is correct, why not simply stay on wireless and not have a wired >component? Wireless speed should be faster than your Internet >connection for http access so the difference in speed should not affect >your internet viewing audience. Yes, the embeded IP Camera is running uClinux and supports ethernet/wireless interfaces. Two interfaces work fine in different subnet. For example, ethernet interface can be used for the Internet access (real IP address) while wireless interface interface can be used for the LAN access (virtual IP address). The two inferfaces working in the same time do have the advantage in some situations. Because it will be a product, I need to consider every possibile situation that ordinary customers might have after they buy IP Camera home. The situation I post is just one of them I am thinking of. If there is no better way to solve "two interfaces in the same subnet using Linux" problem, user manual might need to state "if wired and wireless interfaces are in the same subnet, only one of them gonna work". Or use a HW switch to switch between wired/wireless to make only one infterface work at any time. But it will be considered a drawback/less-feature, for some of interested buyers. thanks for the replies and helps :) AL -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
