Text 145, 45 rader
Skriven 2005-04-20 11:42:36 av Maurice Kinal (1:340/401.1)
    Kommentar till text 142 av Jame Clay (1:120/544)
Ärende: Re: multiple interfaces
===============================
Hey Jame!

Apr 20 13:55 05, Jame Clay wrote to Maurice Kinal:

 MK>> I was wondering about binkd, multiple interfaces and Linux.  Other 
 MK>> then inetd

 JC>    And, of course, xinetd...

Yes.  That too.  Personally I'd prefer something that is standalone which makes
it easier to debug if a problem is found.  Putting too many daemons in the mix
can, and does, cause confusion ... or am I just speaking for myself?

 JC>   As you've already seen;  yes, that would be the bindaddr keyword, 
 JC> in BinkD
 JC> since at least v0.9.6...  Or, at least, in that version as packaged 
 JC> for Debian
 JC>  Sarge...  And since that version is also IPv6 enabled, I use it to 
 JC> bind the
 JC> IPv4 &IPv6 address I want it to be running on...

Right.  We still haven't tried it over the wireless yet as my neighbour has
encountered a hardware problem he wishes to resolve first but we'll get there. 
What I am thinking is having the binkd on there using a different scheme wrt
Fido address(es) then the one running on a different interface and see what
happens.  Hopefully that will enable the possiblilty of having greater control
over who has access to what regarding different networks.  This can and does
get confusing.  Working on reducing instead of increasing the "confusion
factor".

 MK>>  Also could those be more then one interface but 
 MK>> less then the total number of interfaces?

 JC>    I'd think so, although I've only used it for two interfaces out of 
 JC> a total
 JC> that was more than that... 

We'll try three here and see what happens.  Wish us luck please but hoping luck
isn't a factor.  :-)

Life is good,
Maurice

--- Msged/LNX 6.1.2
 * Origin: Coffin Point - Ladysmith, BC Canada (1:340/401.1)