On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Lee Sharp <leesharp at hal dash pc dot org> wrote:
> If you are talking multinet (192.168.3.1/24 and 192.168.4.1/24) it can not
> do this out of the box, (You can with some shell commands) and it is a bad
> idea. But you can do a 192.168.2.1/23 (subnet mask 255.255.254.0) and have
> 510 IP addresses in a single network.
Would someone mind telling me why monowall community and documentation
considers this as a bad idea? To me the network interface aliasing is
extremely good idea. I'm obviously missing something here, since it's
been so long considered as a bad thing in monowall discussions.
I claim it's waste of money and resources to buy separate network
cards and switch just to connect two ip's into the same network (or to
connect to external DSL box), in case of not being bottleneck due
heavy traffic. For me personally this along with the missing openvpn
are the only shortcomings of monowall.