[MLB-WIRELESS] Using the Node Dbase

[Richard Van Orsouw]

Ok, I have never routed IP's on the same network, 

192.168.0.1 omni box
192.168.0.2 node1
192.168.0.3 node2
192.168.0.4 node3

Omni box;s routing table
---------------------------------
Network address	Netmask		Interface
192.168.0.2		255.255.255.0	192.168.0.1
192.168.0.3		255.255.255.0	192.168.0.1
192.168.0.4		255.255.255.0	192.168.0.1

Node1's routing table
------------------------------
Network address	Netmask		Interface
192.168.0.1		255.255.255.0	192.168.0.1
192.168.0.3		255.255.255.255	192.168.0.1
192.168.0.4		255.255.255.255	192.168.0.1

Node2's routing table

Network address	Netmask		Interface
192.168.0.1		255.255.255.0	192.168.0.1
192.168.0.2		255.255.255.255	192.168.0.1
192.168.0.4		255.255.255.255	192.168.0.1


Is this sort of correct ?, am I on the right track?


> ----------
> From: 	Tony Langdon
> Sent: 	Friday, 19 July 2002 2:35 PM
> To: 	Richard Van Orsouw
> Subject: 	RE: [MLB-WIRELESS] Using the Node Dbase
> 
> > Valid point, now I am with you. The box with the omni will do 
> > all the static
> > routing. Hmm but the omni box will have one NIC but see 
> > multiple nodes. The
> > other nodes will only see the omni box. How does networking 
> > addressing and
> > routing work in this case. Since routing occurs between 
> > networks, but if all
> > nodes have the same IP address no routing is required. On the 
> > other hand, if
> > each node was on different network's how would the omni box 
> > route b/w nodes?
> > (ie how can it reside on all networks
> 
> You can setup routes in the same network.  And yes, routing is required,
> if
> the nodes on the same "segment" can't see each other.  In this instance,
> routing is not decided upon by what logical network the nodes belong to
> (they will all belong to the same network, in fact), but whether they can
> physically see each other or not.
> 
> Think of it as like a dialup server with a bunch of PPP users hanging off
> it... :)
> 
> > 
> > Confused
> > (learning curve steep, I haven't got my head around this yet, 
> > I am still
> > relating everything back to standard fixed cable WAN/LANs)
> 
> TCP/IP is more flexible than that :)
> > 
> 
> This correspondence is for the named person's use only. It may contain
> confidential or legally privileged information or both. No confidentiality
> or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. If you receive this
> correspondence in error, please immediately delete it from your system and
> notify the sender. You must not disclose, copy or rely on any part of this
> correspondence if you are not the intended recipient.
> 
> Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
> 
> 

To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message