[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 10:26:58 +0100 Peter Lloyd-Jones wrote:
and what happens when you "ifup <relevant interface name>".[root@xxxxx peter]# /sbin/ifup eth0:1 [root@xxxxx peter]# Nothing (Well not quite true, it thinks about it for a second (or three) then gives me back the prompt. I must be being very dense here, it all seems OK Thanks for your attention, but am still thinking (tinkering!) Peter L-J
I have been playing around with sub-interfaces (I presume that's what they're called under Linux - certainly that's what they're called under Cisco) for various reasons, and it would seem that it doesn't matter if you give a valid address/netmask/etc to a subinterface, it still won't work if the parent device isn't up and running. So, for example, I gave my portable-server (an NFS server that I take to College for the students to access during during classes) the following: eth0 - dynamically assigned: 192.168.1.8/24 (for when it's at home) eth0:1 - statically assigned: 172.16.1.253/24 (for when it's at college) Now, the first time I did this, you couldn't access the server at College... because eth0 hadn't been brought up (via dhcp), so eth0:1 wouldn't work, even though eth0:1 was up. I changed this so that eth0 was statically assigned College's address range and eth0:1 was dhcped, and all is well. This could well be the same situation you're in now, Peter. Although eth0:1 is up, it might not work because eth0 isn't. It might be worth sorting this out to just use eth0. For a simple home setup there should be no reason to use sub-interfaces, unless it's just to have a play and experiment... Grant. -- Artificial intelligence is no match for nuratal stidutipy. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG Mail majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe list" in the message body to unsubscribe. FAQ: www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html