Rereading Peter's note, he doesn't have a routed subnet. Duh. Posting at 1 am is bad.
You could configure VM TCP to proxy arp, but it won't scale. Better to get a routable chunk of space -- get them to give you a reasonably large one, and then you can subdivide as I mentioned earlier without further grief for them. -- db ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Boyes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Linux on 390 Port" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 12:55 AM Subject: Re: routing hipersocket guest LANs without a separate guest LAN s ubnet - impossible? > Peter, > > Is the entire /26 routed via the IP address of the VM TCP stack from the > outside? If so, break up the /26 into two subnets (host addresses 65-126 and > 129-190) and you have the necessary separate LAN segment addressing. It > wastes some host addresses in the first subnet, but gives you 62 hosts in > the second one, and you can subdivide further if necessary (a /29 is > probably the smallest useful subdivision, with 6 hosts per subnet) . > > Check > http://216.239.37.100/search?q=cache:VoFvS3w2dbEC:www.kbeta.com/Ktips/classc > .htm+subnet+mask+table&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 for a useful table of subnet masks and > subnet values. > > You should also consider using a Linux stack to own the OSA. IMHO, this is a > lot easier with Zebra than it is with MPROUTE. Less smoke will come out of > your router jock's ears when they look at the configuration syntax. > > -- db >
