No subject

Because node A, B &C are on the same subnet, I didn't setup another nic for
node B.

The following 2 scenario's are my goals:
1) If node B exists in the private network, nodes A & C must send packets via
node B.
2) If node B doesn't exist in the private network, node A & C can communicate
directly
    with each other.



"Holshouser, David" wrote:

> where is the Internet in this network?
>
> 1. not connected
>     A <--> B <--> C (B has 2 nics?)
>
> 2. Inet <--> A <--> B <--> C (each machine has 2 nics?)
> 3. Inet <--> A <hub> BC
> 4. Inet <dslswitch/dhcp> ABC
>
> If you are shooting for option 3, then a router isn't necessary. Let linux
> do masquerading for you and alls well. That's the most common thing I've
> seen.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Melwyn Pereira [mailto:mpereira at its.bldrdoc.gov]
> > Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 1:09 PM
> > To: lug at lug.boulder.co.us; ss2chef at yahoo.com
> > Subject: Re: [lug] Linux SW router
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I'm trying to build a 3 node network in a peer to peer
> > methodology. These
> > nodes are on the same
> > network. I understand that routers are for different networks
> > but not sure
> > what else to try.
> >
> > Problem:
> > Currently, Node A communicates directly with Node C as they
> > are all on the
> > same network.
> >
> > Goal:
> > Node A  < -- > Node B <--> Node C
> >
> > I am not running public IPs or NAT, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> > Stephen Smith wrote:
> >
> > > Tell us a little about your network.
> > > Topology?
> > > How many nodes?
> > > Are your routing public IPs or will you be
> > > running with private IPs with your device doing
> > > some sort or masq or NAT?
> > >
> > > SGS
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> > Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
> Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug