Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news.magicnet.net!news.thrush.com!alfred!bilver!bill From: bill@bilver.oau.org (Bill Vermillion) Subject: Re: IP Aliasing Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Orlando / Winter Park, FL Date: Sat, 14 Jun 1997 17:07:23 GMT Message-ID: <1997Jun14.170723.14946@bilver.oau.org> References: <01bc576a$ff7a8260$64d91dce@phishhead.dawtech.com> <5njja2$dnh@news.gvsu.edu> <1997Jun10.152644.14248@bilver.oau.org> <5nk0td$hid@news.gvsu.edu> Lines: 39 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:42955 In article <5nk0td$hid@news.gvsu.edu>, Matt Behrens <behrensm@river.it.gvsu.edu> wrote: >Bill Vermillion (bill@bilver.oau.org) wrote: > >: Matt Behrens <behrensm@river.it.gvsu.edu> wrote: > >: >This is a different type of aliasing, no? >: > >: >What the original poster wanted to know about was what should really be >: >called IP masquerading. Aliasing is a different animal. But then again >: >we call our slices partitions and our partitions slices so who cares :) > >: So what is the difference between masquerading and aliasing. > >: They appeared (to me) to do the same thing, and I assumed >: (wrongly I guess) that different OSes named them differently. >Aliasing has always meant, AFAIK, simply allowing an IP address to respond >to packets sent to a different number. i.e. if you have a machine >10.0.0.1 and you want to move it to 10.0.10.1, you alias 10.0.10.1 to >10.0.0.1 and all packets sent to 10.0.10.1 and 10.0.0.1 arrive at >10.0.0.1. When you're finished with the move, of course, you remove the >alias. Well on one site I work with that has Indy's - I have about 60 IPs responsding to the same network card - each has their own domain name and IP. SGI calls that aliasing. >Masquerading (or NAT, network address translation) is the act of providing >a sort of "front" for a number of different hosts on a remote network that >doesn't understand their numbers. In this example, 10.0.0.1, 10.0.0.2, >and 10.0.0.3 can all use 10.10.10.10 to use services on a network that >knows 10.10.10.10 but can't route to 10.0.0.x. That sounds similar to the SGI 'ipalising'. Thanks -- Bill Vermillion - bill.vermillion@oau.org | bill@bilver.com