Re: [9fans] Mail exchanger

[Lucio De Re <lucio@proxima.alt.za>]

On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 04:49:52PM +0100, C H Forsyth wrote:
>
> if so, i wondered why you didn't just add the extra
> interface as an extra interface on the existing IP stack, in which
> case you don't need to mess with net.alt.  for instance,
> 	ip/ipconfig ether /net/ether1 <addresses>

Is this the type of idea (explicitly listing each step)?

	bind -a '#l0' /net
	bind -a '#l1' /net
	bind -a '#I' /net
	ip/ipconfig ether /net/ether0 172.24.16.12 255.255.0.0
	ip/ipconfig -g 196.30.44.1 ether /net/ether1 196.30.44.147 255.255.255.0
	echo 'add 10.17.13.224 255.255.255.240 172.24.16.129' > /net/iproute
	echo 'add 172.16.16.0 255.255.248.0 172.24.16.129' > /net/iproute
	echo 'add 196.25.217.192 255.255.255.248 172.24.16.129' > /net/iproute
	echo 'add 10.17.13.224 255.255.255.240 172.24.16.129' > /net/iproute
	echo 'add 172.16.16.0 255.255.248.0 172.24.16.129' > /net/iproute
	echo 'add 192.168.30.16 255.255.255.248 172.24.16.129' > /net/iproute
	echo 'add 196.25.217.192 255.255.255.248 172.24.16.129' > /net/iproute
	ndb/cs -s
	ndb/dns -rs

The latter (sorry about the unnecessary details) being the exceptional
routes.  And then all the subnets can co-exist in /lib/ndb/local?

Why do I find it hard to believe that it could be this simple?

++L

PS: I would then only need to add the #l1 bind in the namespace
template.  But if I wanted different services on different interfaces
I would have to separate out the networks, wouldn't I?

PPS: Thanks, Charles, if I don't hear further from you, I'll have to
give this a definite try.