From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Aleksandar Milivojevic Subject: Re: again problem with alias / virtual interface Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 12:13:16 -0500 Sender: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <40FEA42C.3050006@pbl.ca> References: <007d01c46dae$0a45f330$eb53623e@x> <20040721114840.G9160@net.tamu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20040721114840.G9160@net.tamu.edu> Errors-To: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org Michael Sconzo wrote: > On Wed, Jul 21, 2004 at 05:34:29PM +0200, Marco Colombo wrote: > > >>But the whole idea of 'virtual interfaces' is obsolete. The linux kernel >>(and thus iptables) knows only of physical interfaces and ip addresses. >>You can set a label for each ip address, but that's only a trick to make >>the old ifconfig work. Labels are, well, just labels, the kernel doesn't >>need them at all. If you're using 'ip' to configure ip addresses, you >>can forget about labels (but ifconfig won't work). >> > What is the proper way to do it, tried poking around on google, maybe > I'm just looking for the wrong thing. Or is it even a proper way to do > it? I have a box that is using kernel bridging so I have an IP on the > bridged interface, but would like to have it accessable via another IP > as well. IMHO, the proper way of doing it is using configuration files. And let the init.d scripts configure your interfaces (majority of which still use good old ifconfig). -- Aleksandar Milivojevic Pollard Banknote Limited Systems Administrator 1499 Buffalo Place Tel: (204) 474-2323 ext 276 Winnipeg, MB R3T 1L7