On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 15:18:02 -0600 (CST) Nate Carlson <natecars at real-time.com> wrote: > On Thu, 4 Dec 2003, Josh Trutwin wrote: > > Does this sound right? > > ifconfig eth2 65.15.208.219 netmask 255.255.255.0 up > > route add -net 65.15.208.0 netmask 255.255.255.0 -gw 65.15.208.219 dev eth2 > > Should work just fine, except '-gw' should just be 'gw'. Note that you > usually don't need to add the subnet route, it generally gets added when > you ifconfig the interface. I do this all the time before sending boxes > out; works great. Thanks, this worked just fine. I actually did need the netmask part of the route command though. I started freaking out though, until I realized that I had the cable plugged into the router, not eth2 of the firewall/router box. Then I started freaking out again when I tried to ping out from the new server, until I remembered that I disabled pinging except from eth1 (local). A few tweeks were required in the firewall so fowarding to/from eth2 wasn't dropped by default. Great learning experience, thanks for the tips. One quick question, it turns out the gw address is 65.15.208.1, when I set up the NIC using ifconfig it seemed to set up the route information correctly on its own. Is that usually the case? Josh _______________________________________________ TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota http://www.mn-linux.org tclug-list at mn-linux.org https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list