Yes, it is safe to say that they cannot use both at the same time. I don't imagine you will have very many instances where someone thinks it is not reasonable that they are offered only one solution at a time. Letting them know they can have both active on seperate networks is feasible should be sufficient. Your config page can have ... [radio] Cat-5 address [input "text"] subnet [input "text"] gateway... [radio] Wireless address [input "text"] subnet [input "text"] gateway... [radio] Simultaneous Cat-5/Wireless Cat-5 address [input "text"] subnet [input "text"] gateway... Wireless address [input "text"] subnet [input "text"] gateway... Then when they submit the page, have your serverside script verify that they are seperate subnets and if not seperate pop up an alert stating they must be on seperate subnets and to please re-enter. That way they don't manually put those settings into each interface and then find problems with the network communication and start calling in thinking it is some error in your design. Just my 2 cents... Larry On Fri, 2004-06-11 at 11:42, Al wrote: > >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
