> 
> Sorry Folks,
> I typed it by hand  output of the commands, duh?! Mistyped IP one ne2 in my
> e-mail.Accept my appologies..
> Okay correction
> IP for ne2 192.168.0.4
> IP for ne3 192.168.0.5

still same IP netmask!

> It's going to be a GATEWAY, but for simplicity let's look at it as a regular
> workstation with 2 NIC's
> Connected to a switch. While ne2 is working, and ne3 is not.
> Sorry for my mistype.
> Thanks,
> So Suggestions anyone?
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Frederick Bruckman" <fb@enteract.com>
> To: "Unix Wizard" <mertis@ameritech.net>
> Cc: "Manuel Bouyer" <bouyer@antioche.lip6.fr>; <netbsd-users@netbsd.org>
> Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 12:45 PM
> Subject: Re: network interfaces
> 
> 
> > On Sun, 11 Mar 2001, Unix Wizard wrote:
> >
> > > Hmmm... That's very interesting.
> > > ifacofig -a shows
> > >
> > > ne2: flags=8863<UP,BROADCAST,NOTRAILERS,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu
> 1500
> > >         address: 00:c0:f0:33:7e:fd
> > >         media: Ethernet 10baseT
> > >         inet 192.168.0.4 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255
> > >
> > >
> > > ne3: flags=8863<UP,BROADCAST,NOTRAILERS,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu
> 1500
> > >         address: 00:c0:f0:33:70:f8
> > >         media: Ethernet 10baseT
> > >         inet 192.168.0.5 netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast 192.168.0.255
> >
> > You can't have two interfaces with the same address! In fact, you
> > can't even have two interfaces on the same machine on the same
> > network. How would it know which interface to send a packet out on?
> >
> > It's a bug that you were even be able to do that!
> >
> > Maybe if you tell us exactly what you're trying to accomplish (dhcp
> > client and gateway for a cable modem?), folks here could help you
> > design a network that makes sense.
> >
> > > But netstat -rn SHOWS:
> > >
> > > Routing tables:
> > >
> > > Internet:
> > > Destination            Gateway        Flags        Refs        Use
> > > Mtu        Interface
> > > 127                        127.0.0.1     UGRS        0             0
> > > 33228        lo0
> > > 127.0.0.1               127.0.0.1        UH          1             36
> > > 33228        lo0
> > > 192.168                  link#1            UC           0              0
> > > 1500        ne2
> > >
> > > Looks like ne3 is missing from routing table, what could be a reason?
> Does
> > > anyone have any Idea, why ne3 is not working and why ne3 is not in
> routing
> > > table?
> >
> >
> > Frederick
> >
> 

----------------------------
Microsoft is not an answer.
Microsoft is the question.
The answer is "NO".