Wireless Bridge, aaarrgghhh

[Peter King]

On Sun, Jan 04, 2004 at 02:19:10PM -0500, Tim Writer wrote:

> > So eth0 = 192.168.0.12 on NET0 (192.168.0.xxx)
> >    eth1 = 192.168.0.22 on NET0
> 
> That doesn't look right.  Why do you have two interfaces on the same network
> (i.e. with same netmask and broadcast address).  Unless you're using advanced
> routing tools to do load balancing or some such, this won't work.

Right you are -- once I gave NET0 a different set of network addresses,
and threw in the relevant iptables command for SNAT, it all Just Works.
(That should really be the slogan for Linux: Once you get it configured,
then, well, It Just Works<tm>.)

Thanks for the suggestion! All is well now.

-- 
Peter King			        peter.king-H217xnMUJC0sA/PxXw9srA at public.gmane.org
Philosophy Department
University of Toronto			    (416)-978-3788 ofc
Toronto, ON   M5S 1A1			    (416)-978-8703 fax
    CANADA
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml