On Tue, September 4, 2012 16:51, Les Mikesell wrote: > > That should happen directly without C's involvement if the netmask is > 255.255.0.0 on A and B's eth1 interfaces. It is not. The netmask on those interfaces is 255.255.255.0. > >> Instead it goes to Eth0 on C where it dies as one would >> expect. > > Why does C have both internet and LAN addresses on the same > interfaces? > I am experimenting to see if this arrangement is workable. I want to know if it is possible to have two separate 192.168.x subnets on the same network. Why? I do not have a purpose in mind. I am just checking out whether it can work or not. If it is impossible then then I will discover why that is so, which I think will be useful in itself. -- *** E-Mail is NOT a SECURE channel *** James B. Byrne mailto:ByrneJB at Harte-Lyne.ca Harte & Lyne Limited http://www.harte-lyne.ca 9 Brockley Drive vox: +1 905 561 1241 Hamilton, Ontario fax: +1 905 561 0757 Canada L8E 3C3