Re: [gentoo-user] Re: [SOLVED] What happened to my 2nd eth0?

[Mick <michaelkintzios@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1321 bytes --]

On Thursday 26 Feb 2015 18:57:44 Walter Dnes wrote:
>   Let's forget about additional routes with different metrics, and try
> to get the simplest case working, and move forward from there.  If I have
> /etc/conf.d/net as...
> 
> modules=( "!iproute2" )  <== Delete this for iproute2 usage ==
> config_eth0="
> 192.168.123.251/29 broadcast 192.168.123.255
> 169.254.1.1/16 broadcast 169.254.255.255"
> routes_eth0="
> default via 192.168.123.254
169.254.0.0/16 via 169.254.1.1"  <==Add this route for 169.254.0.0/16==

or if your router can route packets for the 169.254.0.0/16 subnet (I doubt it) 
then change it to:

169.254.0.0/16 via 192.168.123.254


>   I'm still trying to wrap my brain around how the ADSL router decides
> whether to look for 169.254.0.0/16 on the ethernet cable to the TV tuner
> rather than on the phone line going to my ISP, and then the world.

If the router has link-local configured it should be able to communicate with 
other devices in the same 169.254.0.0/16 subnet.  However, I doubt that it 
will be NAT-ing packets to this subnet, because it is meant for ad-hoc device-
to-device connections when there is no DHCP server in the local network.

Have a look at the router's route and arp tables to see what it does on this 
matter.

-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]