| 1 |
On 2014-11-28 18:35, meino.cramer@×××.de wrote: |
| 2 |
> Do I really need two interfaces isb0 and usb1 with different |
| 3 |
> subnets here? |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Or do I miss something? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
howdy, |
| 9 |
yes you do. |
| 10 |
i.e. |
| 11 |
PC has real-eth0="192.168.1.1/24" |
| 12 |
PC has usb-eth0="192.168.2.1/24" |
| 13 |
PC has usb-eth1="192.168.2.2/24" |
| 14 |
sysA has usb-eth0="192.168.2.101/24" |
| 15 |
sysB has usb-eth0="192.168.2.102/24" |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
from PC you want to ping 192.168.2.101, ok it pings |
| 18 |
then you want to ping 192.168.2.102 and you have a cached route for |
| 19 |
192.168.2.0/24 dev usb-eth0 |
| 20 |
you can get around this using policy routing but that is a bit much for |
| 21 |
what you want. |
| 22 |
you can always use smaller ranges for example: |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
PC usb-eth0="192.168.2.1/25" |
| 25 |
PC usb-eth1="192.168.2.129/25" |
| 26 |
sysA usb-eth0="192.168.2.101/25" |
| 27 |
sysB usb-eth1"192.168.2.254/25" |
Archives