From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Wilson-Lindberg Subject: Re: Multiple interfaces with the same IP address Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 13:52:31 -0700 Message-ID: <4ACCFF8F.1010000@spacex.net> References: <4ACCEDDA.9020508@spacex.net> <4ACCF3F0.5040703@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4ACCF3F0.5040703@hp.com> Sender: netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Rick Jones Cc: Greg Wilson-Lindberg , "netfilter@vger.kernel.org" Rick Jones wrote: ... > > Is there a specific reason you cannot further subnet the 10.0.0.0/8 network for > your HDLC channels and eschew the NAT? Then at least ignoring the issue of > "routing" broadcast datagrams (these are IP broadcasts and not simply ethernet > broadcasts right?) reaching-out and touching the HDLC devices from the WAN would > seem to be more straightforward. > > rick jones > visions of many static routing table entries floating through his head The 10.0.0.0/8 network is an existing network that has 100's of computers on it. We are planning on using some 10.x.0.0/16 addresses to NETMAP to the 172.16.0.0/16 addresses in some limited situations, but this doesn't solve the problem of routing to the correct HDLC channel to get to the final destination. Greg