Re: [LAU] Sending audio to another computer

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 01:09:22PM +0100, Hakan Koseoglu wrote:
> Fons,
>
> On 24 May 2010 09:33, <fons@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
> > Machine A
> >
> > ??eth0 ?? 192.168.1.100 ?? general IP
> > ??eth1 ?? 192.168.99.1 ?? ??audio
> >
> > Machine B
> >
> > ??eth0 ?? 192.168.1.101 ?? general IP
> > ??eth1 ?? 192.168.99.2 ?? ??audio
> >
> As long as you have a netmask of 255.255.255.0 on the network cards,
> you don't have to set up a route. They're on the same network and will
> chat to each other w/o going throuh the default route. A routing is
> required when you want to chat machines outside your local network as
> defined by your netmask bits.

I think what might not be obvious is that a route is automatically created whenever a new interface comes up-- a route to its own local network.

i.e. right now my routing table is:

$ route -n
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
68.28.49.85 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0
0.0.0.0 68.28.49.85 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0

If I bring up a local network, say:
$ sudo ifconfig eth0 192.168.42.177 up

The route to that 42 network is added to the routing table:
$ route -n
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Ref Use Iface
68.28.49.85 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 UH 0 0 0 ppp0
192.168.42.0 0.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 U 0 0 0 eth0
0.0.0.0 68.28.49.85 0.0.0.0 UG 0 0 0 ppp0

Again, assuming we're keeping it simple and dealing with non-overlapping netmasks, a local route doesn't have to be added explicitly. Maybe that's what caused the confusion.

-ken
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Tue May 25 04:15:07 2010