RE: Second ethernet without router?

Thank You Troy and John. I had a gateway address in there and after taking
that out, it worked fine.
Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: redhat-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:redhat-list-
bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John O'Loughlin
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 6:28 PM
To: General Red Hat Linux discussion list
Subject: Re: Second ethernet without router?


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

--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list

Relevant Pages

  • RE: IPNAT / IPF / rdr issue
    ... All your clients are on the LAN behind the gateway correct. ... > request has to go to your ISP DNS server to get your public ip ... > block out log first quick on dc0 all ...
    (freebsd-questions)
  • Re: Default Gateway on VPN subnets
    ... Now I understand that you are using the TZ170 VPN routers to establish the ... Once the default gateway of the remote 2003 server was automatically ... to access the internet or the SBS network? ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • RE: ISA 2004 Firewall Client and ActiveSync 4.2
    ... at home in my WLAN all internet ... that killing my default gateway is not the way ... gateway and the appropriate DNS server entries. ... server internal IP then your client works as a secureNAT client and you're ...
    (microsoft.public.isa.clients)
  • Re: "Classic logon" screen in XP does not remeber the user name
    ... John N ... XP Pro workstation [not for W2003 Server though]. ... user account to the Remote Desktop Users group which should show as ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin)
  • Re: Half Bridge mode and multi-homed box
    ... The router takes all the authentication and link negotiation burden ... > laptop screen whilst I tried to replicate it on the server. ... helldesk of provider) from whoever remembers it for too long. ... The provider's gateway is on a completely different ...
    (comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc)