Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 05/28/2014 02:26 PM, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 5/28/2014 3:00 PM, Michael Hennebry wrote:
On Wed, 28 May 2014, Bowie Bailey wrote:
On 5/28/2014 1:29 AM, Michael Hennebry wrote:
On Tue, 27 May 2014, John R Pierce wrote:
On 5/27/2014 5:38 PM, Michael Hennebry wrote:
<snip>
> The later editions of fedora didn't like it, so I switched to > CentOS. Now I have two 64-bit machines and two monitors and a
CenturyLink
> router. Also a KVM switch that I have not taken out of the package. > My main machine has two video connections and two ethernet
connections,
> eth0 and eth1 .My secondary machine sometimes runs Windows, > so I'd like it not to have its own global IP address. > My first thought would be to connect it directly > to one of the ethernet ports on my main machine. > > How do I go about this?
<snip>
Why do you want to connect the two computers like this? It is usually more trouble than it's worth unless you want to use the first computer as a firewall or something. Just connect both of them to your router and everything should work fine.
<snip>
I want the second computer to not have its own global IP address. It will at least occasionally run Windows. I'd prefer not to assume that Windows will not try to fetch an IP address behind my back.
The router should have a built-in switch with multiple network jacks. Just plug the new computer into the router along with the old one and you should be fine.
<snip>
This is NORMALLY true ... although some ISPs provide multiple real IP addresses too.
AFAIK, not unless you pay extra.
It is easy enough to test though ... plug in the computer that works, look at its IP address, if it is in the private range (192.168.x.x, 10.x.x.x, 172.16..x.x to 172.31.x.x) then the provided router is isolating the real IP on the outside port.
It is also then also normally true that internal ports are NAT'ed and isolated from the outside world.
<snip> I was under the impression that the OP actually doesn't want it visible to the world, isn't intending to browse or email via it, but that it was for *only* inside. IF that is the case, he'd have to go into the router and tell it to assign it an internal IP, and to *not* NAT it.
mark