On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 13:43 -0500, Scot L. Harris wrote: > On Mon, 2005-02-14 at 13:35, David Benigni wrote: > > > > > I don't want to bond the nics. I need to have multiple ip addresses up > > on this box, I want to bind one to eth0 and many to eth1. > > > > >A little more information on your network design may be helpful. And > > >why do you want to manually bounce the interfaces? > > > > I don't want too manually bounce the interfaces, in troubleshooting of > > another issue I took down eth1 and noticed the behavior. This might be > > normal, but I'm curious if it should do this. > > > > Thanks, > > Dave > Having looked at the /etc/sysconfig/network line with GATEWAY=w.x.y.z and the fact that gateway is NOT in either of the ifcfg-eth[01] files, I wonder if the entire problem can be fixed by simply moving the gateway line from the network file to ifcfg-eth0 ?? It may be worth a try. > It would be informative to see the netstat -rn data from the point that > both interfaces are working correctly and then after you take one of the > interfaces down. > > I suspect you will have a single default gateway listed, the last column > on the right should list which interface that default gateway will use. > > If the default gateway is on the interface you took down then I would > expect that route to go away. However if it is on the other interface > that remains up then I would expect that route to stay in the router > table. If it does go away then you should file a bug report because it > sounds like the decision to remove routes is based on the IP addressing > not the interface itself that went down. > > -- > Scot L. Harris > webid@xxxxxxxxxx > > Majorities, of course, start with minorities. > -- Robert Moses >
