<html>
<head>
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
</style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
Thanks for the hint! I had a first look at how to run VLANs in Debian.<br><br>There are conflicting information about how to do this. For example you say it can be done by using this notation: "eth0.1". However, this doesn't seem to work for me. I have to do it this way: "vlan2" and add a "vlan_raw_device eth0" line. However, afterwards I cannot reach any components on the VLANs. Am I right that this whole thing only works with special hardware, like VLAN-enabled switches and so on?<br><br>The funny thing is that the old setup kind of worked as well, you just couldn't count on it...<br><br>If setting up a VLAN environment should turn out to be too complicated, I think I will just merge all networks into one -- granted: it's just avoiding and not solving the problem.<br><br><br>Best regards,<br><br>Morin<br><br><br><br><br>> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 18:18:28 +0000<br>> Subject: Re: [Firehol-support] Routing between virtual interfaces<br>> From: cefrodrigues@gmail.com<br>> To: mofog@hotmail.com<br>> CC: firehol-support@lists.sourceforge.net<br>> <br>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 5:59 PM, M. O. <mofog@hotmail.com> wrote:<br>> > Are there known issues or some kind of traps to watch out for when<br>> > configuring routing between virtual interfaces? What makes me curious is<br>> > that "route" doesn't seem to be aware of virtual interfaces at all -- it<br>> > calls everything "eth0" instead of "eth0:1" and so on.<br>> <br>> That's because, AFAIK, interfaces with multiple IP addresses (either<br>> in the same subnet or not) are the same interface: "eth0:1" is really<br>> just an extra address for "eth0", not an interface.<br>> <br>> I think extra addresses for an interface get a virtual interface name<br>> just because the "ifconfig" command requires it. If you add an extra<br>> address with the "ip" command, there is no need for that name and<br>> everything works exactly the same (except it won't be visible with<br>> "ifconfig").<br>> <br>> If you really need virtual interfaces over the same physical<br>> interface, you should consider using VLANs. Unlike Windows, having an<br>> host interface in multiple VLANs is supported for all ethernet cards.<br>> <br>> How you do this will depend on your particular distribution. For<br>> example, in Debian-based distributions, it is as simple as giving a<br>> particular name to an interface in "/etc/network/interfaces" (eg:<br>> "eth0.2" automatically means the VLAN with ID "2" over the "eth0"<br>> interface). Anyway, whichever the distribution, a virtual interface<br>> for a particular VLAN will only see traffic for that particular VLAN<br>> and will be seen by the rest of the system (including routing) as a<br>> real interface (the physical interface, "ethX", will always see<br>> traffic for _all_ VLANs on the link).<br>> <br>> Regards,<br>> <br>> -- <br>> Carlos Rodrigues<br><br /><hr />Der neue Messenger 2009 ist da! <a href='http://redirect.gimas.net/?n=M0902WLM2009' target='_new'>Kostenlos downloaden!</a></body>
</html>