Hi,
I got a couple of answers, thanks to Dang, Vinh Khanh
[Vinh.Dang_at_dsto.defence.gov.au] who basically suggested the following
(a) update the /etc/hosts file to include both ip addresses, eg
128.89.101.90 unixbox
128.89.100.90 unixbox-2 # other name and ip for the
unixbox on PC vlan.
(b) add a line to the /etc/routes file so that we know how to get to the
other network directly, eg this is what the routes file now looks like
default 128.89.101.254 # change this IP to your default
-net 128.89.100 -interface 128.89.100.90
(c) also you of course need to add entries to /etc/rc.config to configure
the second ethernet card, eg
NETDEV_1="tu1"
export NETDEV_1
IFCONFIG_1="128.89.100.90 netmask 255.255.255.0"
export IFCONFIG_1
NUM_NETCONFIG="2"
export NUM_NETCONFIG
(d) and give it a kitg
To check that things were working I did
(a) traceroute to a PC and found that it did it in one hop rather than 2,
and
(b) listed the arp table with "arp -a" after I had setup samba on the unix
box and found that all the PCs were listed against their MAC address.
Dennis
Others who replied:
Habeebulla Suhail [suhail_at_alrajhibank.com.sa] who suggested:-
we have a similar setup as yours, but you don't need to add another NIC on
the Server. cisco router will take care of forwarding packets between
networks.
you have just add a route in the unix box, to see from vlan100 to vlan101.
suppose your unix box is in vlan100, and you want to see vlan101.
route add -net <vlan101> <default cisco router in vlan100> <netmask>
Warren Sturm [wrsturm_at_MtRoyal.AB.CA] who suggested the following, which may
or may not work, I didn't try this, since basically I wanted the routing of
traffic to happen at the link layer or MAC address.:-
What about running gated with rip and interfaces all set passive
>From my gated.conf
interfaces {
interface all passive ;
} ;
# Enable RIP and send RIP updates only if >1 interface is configured
# emulating /usr/sbin/routed
#rip yes ;
# the following clause when uncommented act same as "routed -q" mode;
# (i.e. quite mode) -- never send RIP update even >1 interface configured.
rip yes
{
nobroadcast;
} ;
Serguei Patchkovskii [patchkov_at_ucalgary.ca] who thought:-
I suspect that your netmask setting on one of the interfaces may be wrong.
What are your netmask settings for the two interfaces (ifconfig tu0;
ifconfig tu1)?
What are the contents of the IP routing tables (netstat -rn)?
and Phil Baldwin [baldwinp_at_eurodis.com], who had a similar comment to
Habeebulla.
The original question was:-
> Hi,
>
> I have a machine that I have just loaded truV5.1 onto and I have also put
> another 10/100 DE500 ethernet card into. We have a network that is based
> on
> a B-class address. The machine is connected to a Cisco something or other.
> The Cisco supports vlans, and we currently have the network subdivided
> into
> vlans which reflect the third number if the IP, ie vlan100 includes all ip
> address that have the format <1st byte of B-address>.<2nd byte of
> B-address>.100.xxx. All unix and PC's are setup with a network mask of
> 255.255.255.0. So for a packet to go from vlan100 to vlan101 it has to go
> through the Cisco router. Currently all the unix workstations are on
> vlan101
> and all PC's within the group are on vlan100.
>
> For those that may not know, from the Cisco point of view all devices
> connected to the same vlan can be seen as being connected to the same
> piece
> of wire. So devices can talk to each other at the MAC address level (ie
> ethernet card address).
>
> What I want to do is allow the PC's to directly talk to the unix box by
> having 2 ethernet cards in the same box, one connected to vlan101 (unix
> boxes) the other connected to vlan100 (PCs).
>
> I thought this would be a simple operation, but when I try to configure
> both
> cards the unix box stops talking to the network. The only way to get out
> of
> this, is to reboot the unix box with only one of the cards configured.
> Setting up the /etc/rc.config to only configure one card and then running
> rcinet doesn't seem to do the trick.
>
> I have looked through my collection of summaries and can only find vague
> descriptions of what the problem might be. At first reading of one of the
> summaries, it would appear that you can't have 2 different default routes
> for the same machine, in the same address space. But I was NOT setting up
> 2
> default routes, because there should be no need for there to be a default
> route for the unix box to the PC vlan100.
>
> Is anyone able to point me in a direction of where I can find information
> on
> how IP addresses work, and how if possible could I setup a unix box so
> that
> it is seen as a member of both vlans. Of course one solution would be,
> change the configuration at the Cisco so that both vlans are amalgamated
> into one, that solution is not within scope I'm afraid.
######################################
Dennis Macdonell
Systems Administrator
AUSLIG
mail: PO Box 2, Belconnen, ACT 2617
email: mcdonell_at_auslig.gov.au
ph: 61 2 6201 4326
fax: 61 2 6201 4377
######################################
Received on Wed Apr 11 2001 - 00:27:06 NZST