24 May
2010
24 May
'10
9:11 p.m.
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 01:09:22PM +0100, Hakan Koseoglu wrote:
Fons,
On 24 May 2010 09:33, <fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
I think what might not be obvious is that a route is automatically created whenever a new
interface comes up-- a route to its own local network.
i.e. right now my routing table is:
$ route -n
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
68.28.49.85 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0
0.0.0.0 68.28.49.85 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0
If I bring up a local network, say:
$ sudo ifconfig eth0 192.168.42.177 up
The route to that 42 network is added to the routing table:
$ route -n
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
68.28.49.85 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0
192.168.42.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
0.0.0.0 68.28.49.85 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0
Again, assuming we're keeping it simple and dealing with non-overlapping netmasks, a
local route doesn't have to be added explicitly. Maybe that's what caused the
confusion.
-ken
Machine A
??eth0 ?? 192.168.1.100 ?? general IP
??eth1 ?? 192.168.99.1 ?? ??audio
Machine B
??eth0 ?? 192.168.1.101 ?? general IP
??eth1 ?? 192.168.99.2 ?? ??audio
As long as you have a netmask of 255.255.255.0 on the network cards,
you don't have to set up a route. They're on the same network and will
chat to each other w/o going throuh the default route. A routing is
required when you want to chat machines outside your local network as
defined by your netmask bits.