It sounds like this is what you did...look at output of the route command
to see what the default route is.
You don't need a router to connect together the second interfaces as long
as they are all on the same subnet.
John
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007, Troy Amburg wrote:
You might want make sure you didn't set the default route for the entire
host to 192.168.1.1.
On Nov 28, 2007, at 3:39 PM, Steven Buehler wrote:
I have several servers running on public IP's all on their eth0's.
They of course have a router -> switch -> servers. I would like to
setup a
local net on the eth1's of each server, but I don't have a router. Just
the
switch and servers. I must have goofed something up pretty bad because
I
setup the eth1 on one of the servers to have an IP of 192.168.1.1, Mask
of
255.255.255.0 and gateway of 192.168.1.1. The second server was an IP
of
192.168.1.2, Mask of 255.255.255.0 and gateway of 192.168.1.1. After
doing
an "ifup eth1" on each machine, the public IP's on the eth0's can't be
reached any more either. Do I need to have a separate router and switch
to
do this?
Thanks
Steve
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
