Re: Autoipd fails to give ip address to eth0:0
- From: Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 19:13:22 GMT
Radagan@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Yeah, I'm aware of the ip range... and I have to disagree, there are
very good reasons to do this. In this case, I have two services running
on the same system which need to each bind to their own interface or
they cannot send and receive traffic on the same port.
You cannot do it - there are no separate ports for the
different IP addresses present on a host. The IP alias
on an interface does not create additional parallel ports.
Besides, having two interfaces in the same subnet is
not a good idea in the general case. It makes simple
routing impossible. There are special cases, e.g.
load balancing, but a pair of aliased interfaces
on a common NIC does not apply here.
But back to my question, do you know why autoipd will not assign to a
virtual interface?
It is against the design philosophy of the zero configuration
system. Please read the documents at <http://www.zeroconf.org/>.
--
Tauno Voipio
tauno voipio (at) iki fi
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Autoipd fails to give ip address to eth0:0
- From: Radagan
- Re: Autoipd fails to give ip address to eth0:0
- References:
- Autoipd fails to give ip address to eth0:0
- From: Radagan
- Re: Autoipd fails to give ip address to eth0:0
- From: Tauno Voipio
- Re: Autoipd fails to give ip address to eth0:0
- From: Radagan
- Autoipd fails to give ip address to eth0:0
- Prev by Date: Re: Switchless TCP/IP networking?
- Next by Date: Re: Linux read (true i.e. burned in) MAC address
- Previous by thread: Re: Autoipd fails to give ip address to eth0:0
- Next by thread: Re: Autoipd fails to give ip address to eth0:0
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|