| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 4141.1 | | KITCHE::schott | Eric R. Schott USG Product Management | Sat Jan 27 1996 10:50 | 3 |
| 4141.2 | | EEMELI::SYVANEN | Tero Syv�nen MCS @FNO 879-4567 | Sat Jan 27 1996 13:44 | 10 |
| 4141.3 | Better performance if... | RICKS::OPP | | Sat Jan 27 1996 19:57 | 8 |
| 4141.4 | Beware of the subnet ... | ZUR01::SUTTER | Who are you ??? - I'm BATMAN !!! | Sun Jan 28 1996 07:03 | 9 |
| 4141.5 | Really ? | LEMAN::AGASSIS | http://www-mcs.geo.dec.com/ | Mon Jan 29 1996 09:44 | 46 |
| 4141.6 | | CRONIC::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Fri Jan 03 1997 17:01 | 49 |
| 4141.7 | | VAXCPU::michaud | Jeff Michaud - ObjectBroker | Fri Jan 03 1997 21:17 | 10 |
| 4141.8 | | CRONIC::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Wed Jan 08 1997 11:34 | 7 |
| 4141.9 | | SANITY::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Fri May 02 1997 13:19 | 7 |
| Hi
This question has reared its head again. Is the use of aliases, as
described in 4141.6, a 'supported configuration' under Digital UNIX?
Thanks!
tl
|
| 4141.10 | | SANITY::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Tue May 06 1997 22:23 | 4 |
| Should do an informational QAR on this?
Thanks!
tl
|
| 4141.11 | | KITCHE::schott | Eric R. Schott USG Product Management | Tue May 06 1997 22:43 | 9 |
| I don't see any question about aliases in .6
perhaps you can be more clear with your question...
there are aliases in the hosts file
there are aliases in mail
there are ifconfig -alias
I don't see you asking about any of them here.
|
| 4141.12 | | SANITY::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Mon May 12 1997 13:00 | 9 |
| Eric
Thanks for asking for clarification. Here is my question: is the
assignment of multiple IP addresses to a single adapter, using the
ifconfig -alias method, a supported feature of Digital UNIX V3 and
greater?
Thanks!
tl
|
| 4141.13 | | KITCHE::schott | Eric R. Schott USG Product Management | Tue May 13 1997 04:19 | 2 |
| Yup...we expect the addresses to be on the same subnet as
the interface.
|
| 4141.14 | | SANITY::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Tue May 13 1997 11:34 | 26 |
| Thanks. I have an FDDI adapter in a Digital UNIX server. This server,
which performs backups and restores over the network, takes care of
backup clients in ~8 different IP subnets. So, I've attached addresses
in eight different subnets to this FDDI adapter, as in:
ifconfig fta0 alias 16.127.32.4 netmask 255.255.255.0 # FAB 6 TOOL
SEGMENT
ifconfig fta0 alias 16.127.48.4 netmask 255.255.255.0 # FAB 6
ifconfig fta0 alias 16.127.64.4 netmask 255.255.255.0 # WSM (Original
WSM network)
ifconfig fta0 alias 16.127.80.4 netmask 255.255.255.0 # WSM2
(overflow network)
ifconfig fta0 alias 16.127.192.4 netmask 255.255.255.0 # CIME
ifconfig fta0 alias 16.127.208.4 netmask 255.255.255.0 # FAB 6 (2nd
network)
ifconfig fta0 alias 16.127.224.4 netmask 255.255.255.0 # SMT (ASD or
UOG)
ifconfig fta0 alias 16.127.240.4 netmask 255.255.255.0 # SMT
ifconfig fta0 alias 16.128.0.4 netmask 255.255.255.0 # FINANCE, IM&T
and MATERIALS
ifconfig fta0 alias 16.128.160.4 netmask 255.255.255.0 # SPT
Said this way, is this legal and supported?
Thanks
tl
|
| 4141.15 | not supported | SMURF::DUSTIN | | Wed May 14 1997 12:05 | 8 |
| Said that way, no, it is not legal and it is not supported.
A related question might be, will it work? The answer is it
probably will work, although a few things might be a little
flakey, depending on what you are trying to do...
John
|
| 4141.16 | | SANITY::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Fri May 30 1997 16:11 | 12 |
| Hi John
Thanks for the response. Rats. May I poke at this a bit? I believe
it is legal to have two network adapters in the same system, each with
a different IP address. True?
So what makes a single network adapter with two IP addresses illegal in
Digital UNIX? Windows NT supports this; it's one method used for
offering multiple Web servers on a single system.
Thanks
tl
|
| 4141.17 | same subnet restriction | SMURF::DUSTIN | | Fri May 30 1997 18:34 | 11 |
| Your particular addresses are in different subnets, which is
the problem.
Digital UNIX supports thousands of IP aliases associated with a
single interface.
Anyway, legal or not, it will probably work ok if you pay attention
to routing tables and set things up right.
John
|
| 4141.18 | | SANITY::LEMONS | And we thank you for your support. | Mon Jun 02 1997 14:52 | 7 |
| Hi John
You mentioned that "Digital UNIX supports thousands of IP aliases
associated with a single interface." So these addresses would all need
to be in the same subnet, in order to be 'legal'?
tl
|