From: chuck gelm <chuck@gelm.net>
To: Andrew Langdon-Davies <ald2@arrakis.es>
Cc: linux-newbie@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: daisychain addresses
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:15:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4051C5E5.6080004@gelm.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <40518631.5020203@arrakis.es>
Andrew Langdon-Davies wrote:
> Hello,
> In a daisychain network such as this:
> fw/router------server------workstation1------workstation2 (these are
> descriptions, not real hostnames), how should the addresses be set up?
> At the moment, all the machines are on 192.168.0.0. Is this wrong?
> Each machine can ping its neighbour but no farther, except for
> 'server', which can connect to the Internet via 'fw/router'. But
> 'workstation1' cannot ping 'fw/server', even after doing 'route add
> fw/router gw server eth0'. Using numerical addresses makes no
> difference. All my /etc/hosts list every machine. Daisychaining does
> not seem to be very much covered in the documentation I've found. I'm
> sure I'm making a basic mistake (apart from being too stingy to invest
> in hubs or switches or whatever). Therefore, a basic (and very
> general) question: What is the correct way to address machines in this
> sort of topology?
> TIA,
> Andrew
Hi, Andrew:
Q. "...how should the addresses be set up?"
A. On different networks.
Q. "...Is this wrong?"
A. No if you 'subnet', yes if you do not.
Statement: "But 'workstation1' cannot ping 'fw/server', even after doing
'route add fw/router gw server eth0'."
Comment: I would like to see the output of 'ifconfig' and 'route -n' on
'workstation1'.
You have, at least, one other topology option without adding hardware.
Though,
I'll try to answer your question modified thusly:
"What is ['the correct','a way','a good way'] to address machines in
this sort of topology?".
internet<?>fw/router<192.168.0.1>------<192.168.0.2>server<192.168.1.2>---
---<192.168.1.3>workstation1<192.168.2.3>------<192.168.2.4>workstation2
I think. Your mileage may vary. ;-)
Regards, Chuck
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-newbie" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.linux-learn.org/faqs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-12 14:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-12 9:43 daisychain addresses Andrew Langdon-Davies
2004-03-12 14:15 ` chuck gelm [this message]
2004-03-12 14:52 ` Andrew Langdon-Davies
2004-03-12 16:10 ` chuck gelm
2004-03-12 16:21 ` Ray Olszewski
2004-03-12 19:13 ` Andrew Langdon-Davies
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4051C5E5.6080004@gelm.net \
--to=chuck@gelm.net \
--cc=ald2@arrakis.es \
--cc=linux-newbie@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox