On Mon, 2002-12-16 at 17:46, Ashley M. Kirchner wrote: > Bret Hughes wrote: > > >I believe that the ifup scripts will create a route for the subnet > >specified in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth? just like it did > >for your one interface. > > > >It should not affect the default route at all as that is typically set > >at a higher level in /etc/sysconfig/network > > > >The default gateway is only used if the kernel cannot find a subnet > >corresponding to the ipaddress of an outging packet on one of the > >active interfaces. > > > > > Actually, the more I think about this.... I shouldn't need to set a > default GW (other than what's already there) for the new subnet. It's > not like these packets have to be routed anywhere specifically. So, why > bother with a GW? >
That is exactly correct and what I was trying to say with too much other crap thrown in. if you do a route -n you will see a network route for the subnet of your existing lan. in addition to a default route (0.0.0.0) After bringing up the next interface you will see a route for the new network too and all packet detined for machines on the new network will be spit out the corresponding interface. Bret -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
