I don't normally set IP addresses on interfaces which I know to be offline, so perhaps my methodology here was flawed. In this case, I set IP addresses on eno2, eno3, and eno4 to test whether or not they were actually discrete interfaces, or if they were all somehow mapped to the one interface which was actually connected.
Normally, I only set IP addresses on interfaces which are already connected, but in that case I will stop seeing a ping response from any IP on an interface which is subsequently disconnected, regardless of whether or not I have multiple interfaces on the same subnet. The reason I was trying to figure out whether or not they were actually mapped to the same physical interface was that I needed to setup a bonded interface. A quick unload/reload of the network driver resulted in a correct mapping (eno1->eth0, eno2->eth1, etc.) and then I was able to set up the bonded interface in active/passive failover mode just fine. So it's all set now. Thanks! On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 10:11 AM, David Wright <deb...@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote: > On Fri 30 Mar 2018 at 23:16:26 (-0400), David Parker wrote: > > They are all on the same subnet, yes. But I haven't ever seen this > > behavior before. Normally, when I have an interface which is unplugged, > > its IP is unreachable. > > So we have two machines, one with eth0, eth1, eth2, eth3 and one > with eno1, eno2, eno3, eno4. The first one has no issues, and the > second reportedly does. > > What differences are there in the symptoms presented by the two > machines? Are the former's interfaces on the same subnet too? > > AIUI, which is not very much, your ping behaviour is not unexpected, > and running multiple interfaces on the same subnet takes some out > of the ordinary configuration. (Or are your interfaces eno2-4 just > treading water until you have something to connect them too?) > > Cheers, > David. > > -- Dave Parker '11 Database & Systems Administrator Utica College Integrated Information Technology Services (315) 792-3229 Registered Linux User #408177
