<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>As long as none of the servers are doing ip forwarding all he needs to do is hook the backend up and assign the IP's. Nothing on the frontend network will have a route to the backend network, so no communication between the two will be possible.</div><div><br></div><div>If he wants his backend network to have a route out of the subnet things get a little more complicated, but this just sounds like he wants to hook a bunch of second NIC's to a totally seperate switch that will be used just for the servers communicating on the second NIC's. </div><div><br></div><br><div><div>On May 11, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Jeff Lightner wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0; "><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="blue"><o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="PersonName"><div><div class="Section1"><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; "><font size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy; ">I don’t see how bonding would do what he wants. He wants to separate traffic – not combine it.<o:p></o:p></span></font></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; "><font size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy; "><o:p> </o:p></span></font></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; "><font size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy; ">What we do for separate traffic (we do it for a backup LAN on GigE network while primary is on 10/100) is simply assign the IPs to a different <hostname>b instead of just <hostname>. The only traffic that can find other hosts on the backup LAN have to look for it by that secondary name with the “b” appended. <o:p></o:p></span></font></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; "><font size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy; "><o:p> </o:p></span></font></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; "><font size="2" color="navy" face="Arial"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial; color: navy; ">For example: hostname = winsuck then the secondary IP would only be known by winsuckb. A configuration for Samba expecting shares from winsuck wouldn’t see them from winsuckb even if they were there because it wouldn’t be looking for anything at that name.<o:p></o:p></span></font></div><div style="margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; "><br></div></div></div></o:smarttagtype></div></span></blockquote></div></body></html>