[UUG/MLUG] forward from joe via technical difficulties

[EMAIL:PROTECTED]

On Sat, 9 Jan 1999, Donnelly, Mark J. wrote:
> My Linux box has its token-ring address of 128.206.x.y; my NT box has
> 128.206.x.z as its address.  I have no authority to dole out any further
> 128.206 addresses.  What address should I use for each machine's ethernet
> connections?  Should I have it as 128.206.x.1 and 128.206.x.2 and just not
> add them into my routing tables (i.e., the linux machine has an ethernet
> card with an address of 128.206.x.1, but the route to 128.206.x.1 is through
> the token-ring card)?  Should I have it as 10.0.1.10 and 10.0.1.11?  If I
> have to go with 10.0.1.10 as I think I have to, can I even set up a route to
> the NT box at 128.206.x.z that goes through a 10.0.1.10?
> 
> I'm fairly certain that if I figure out which IP addresses to use, I can
> figure out how to configure the rest (use the default gateway with a metric
> of 2, and the line-secure route with a metric of 1), but I'm just really not
> sure which way to jump on this.  What do you all think?

Mark,

There's a beautiful slew of numbers like 10.x.x.x that I generally prefer
to use: 192.168.x.x. Call me crazy, I just prefer using the smaller sets.

Even still, your example of 10.0.1.10 and 10.0.1.11 should work fine.
Historically if you were setting up a "private" network like that, you'd
add some entried to your HOST file creating a name which dumped out into
that network. You can also just hard-code 'em into whatever, but I
generally prefer the "/etc/hosts" type option.

If you then want to do NFS or Telnet or whatever, you just specify that
host you set up in the /etc/hosts that corresponds to 10.0.1.x

-joe