From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Erik Enge Subject: Re: If eth0 goes down after a reboot, rules for it will be applied to eth1. Date: 11 Sep 2002 14:25:56 -0400 Sender: netfilter-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <873csg4c3v.fsf@prium.net> References: <87ofb44i7l.fsf@prium.net> <20020911174425.URMD287.mta02-svc.ntlworld.com@there> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20020911174425.URMD287.mta02-svc.ntlworld.com@there> 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" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Antony Stone Cc: netfilter@lists.netfilter.org Antony Stone writes: > Ugh !!! What sort of networking setup have you got here ??? A fictional one. :-) Here's what we are thinking about doing, with the actual subnets: NIC 1, eth0, 192.168.1.0, private LAN NIC 2, eth1, 192.168.10.0, DMZ NIC 3, eth2, 192.168.11.0, DMZ located elsewhere NIC 4, eth3, 10.0.0.0, backup subnet NIC 5, eth4, some-other-subnet-that-leads-to-the-internet > Give us more information about your overall network setup, and we'll > probably either tell you that you've been very lucky with your routing > table setup, or that you've got more to worry about than one of your > NICs dying :-) :-) Ok, given the above configuration, and as we discussed before, why is it inconceivable that the interface would communicate with my router? Thanks for your help so far, Erik. Note: currently, we only have one small firewall with a LAN behind it. The reason we need this quite elaborate setup (assuming we're not going to buy any switches) is that we are moving part of our infrastructure to a colocation.