In article <55ae6ce7fe2cbdba1514f1072281c006.squirrel at webmail.harte-lyne.ca>, James B. Byrne <byrnejb at harte-lyne.ca> wrote: > I have been looking at this problem on and off for a considerable > period. Given my lack of knowledge I have been unable to resolve this > quickly and in consequence it has been constantly shoved to the > background as other issues arise. > > Here is the situation: > > An ASCII art diagram might help, or might not. > > <pre> > > kvmh1g1 eth0/192.168.51.1 > eth1/aaa.bbb.ccc.151 <-------------> | > | > kvmh1 br1/aaa.bbb.ccc.51 | > |---> br0/192.168.51.1 | > X | > kvmh2 |---> br0/192.168.52.1 | > br1/aaa.bbb.ccc.52 | > | > kvmh2g1 eth0/192.168.52.1 | > eth1/aaa.bbb.ccc.251 <-------------> | > | > gateway eth1/aaa.bbb.ccc.1 <---------------> | > > </pre> > Why are you using two separate subnets, 192.168.51.0/24 and 192.168.52.0/24? That is the core of your problem. You can't use a crossover cable between different subnets; you would need a router. There may be an esoteric way, but it's not a normal configuration. But they don't need to be different subnets at all. Logically speaking, they are the same subnet. So give kvmh1:br0 192.168.51.1 and kvmh2:br0 192.168.51.2. Then they can talk to each other easily, without doing anything special. On the guests, give them 192.168.51.11 and 192.168.12 (for example). I don't think they should use the same IP addresses as their hosts. Cheers Tony -- Tony Mountifield Work: tony at softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk Play: tony at mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org