Timeline for Two IPv4 adapters in same PC on same network valid?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 22, 2014 at 15:53 | comment | added | Frank Thomas |
@SpeedCoder, as regards routing, you can use route print to observe the routeing table. you will notice that both NICs have a default gateway, so when routing to an unknown address, windows will pick an interface (usually based on the order in which it was initialized and bound) and use that for default routing. you can alter the binding order to a limited extent if you want to specify which is used. It will not load balance or allow link aggregation without some additional software however (and compatible hardware if you want to use LAG).
|
|
| Aug 22, 2014 at 15:48 | comment | added | Frank Thomas | @SpeedCoder, in the case that you have two end-points on one box, with two distinct IP addresses and cabling to the switch, no there is no problem. You may be thinking of issues with LAN intermediary systems (switches, hubs, bridges, etc) that are interconnected via redundant physical pathways. this can cause broadcast storms and other issues with LAN (OSI Layer 2) operations, so networking pros came up with techniques like the Spanning Tree Protocol to manage the interconnecting links. This is only an issue for devices in the middle of the network, not end-points. | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 15:28 | comment | added | SpeedCoder5 | Thanks. There is a client program on the PC that is discovering IPv4 devices - so sine it keeps finding the same device through both adapters I don't know which local adapter to report the device was discovered through. I thought IP needed to have a different network for each adapter to properly route. | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 15:25 | vote | accept | SpeedCoder5 | ||
| Aug 22, 2014 at 15:03 | comment | added | Frank Thomas | @Op, what is your goal? do you plan to run different services on each nic, or are you trying to get something else out of this? | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 14:51 | answer | added | Paul | timeline score: 3 | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 14:49 | comment | added | Ramhound | @heavyd - The information provided by the author clearly indicates that is the case. | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 14:47 | answer | added | Eugen Rieck | timeline score: -1 | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 14:47 | comment | added | heavyd | Are they connecting to the same router? | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 14:47 | comment | added | Ramhound | All this means is both adapters are connected to the same network. Your question is not clear. The current behavior is what I would expect if both adaptors are connected to the exact same network. | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 14:44 | comment | added | HopelessN00b | What's problem here? Or, probably more accurately... what do you think the problem is here? | |
| Aug 22, 2014 at 14:41 | history | migrated | from serverfault.com (revisions) | ||
| Aug 22, 2014 at 14:39 | history | asked | SpeedCoder5 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |