Now, it is my suspicion that the apparent need for promisc at the router
end indeed is an apperent one and not really the router's fault but rather
the other end's. The other end, in this case, is the server below.
If the server, with its single MIB, default-routes its packets through one
Hiya Nikos, re list,
Hm, the promiscuous mode must be needed for the vlan driver.
But you don't have to set it.
It does not work without, at the router end. Suspicions, please see below.
I can't think of any implication in a switched ethernet environment.
It is just that every frame
Peter Cornelius wrote:
- On my router, why do I have to set the base interface to
promiscuous mode in order to get packets from/to my vlans through? Am
I doing something wrong? Are there any implications of working this
way?
Hm, the promiscuous mode must be needed for the vlan driver.
But you
Dear all,
While I'm at it, I don't seem to be able to get my head around some networking
items I observed (currently only vlan(4), not ng_vlan(4), if that makes a
difference):
- On my router, why do I have to set the base interface to promiscuous mode in
order to get packets from/to my vlans
