Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!ucla-cs!zen!ucbvax!NUHUB.ACS.NORTHEASTERN.EDU!JOHNSON From: JOHNSON@NUHUB.ACS.NORTHEASTERN.EDU ("I am only an egg.") Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: adversity or perversity Message-ID: <8707281815.AA00206@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: Tue, 28-Jul-87 07:09:00 EDT Article-I.D.: ucbvax.8707281815.AA00206 Posted: Tue Jul 28 07:09:00 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 30-Jul-87 00:39:42 EDT Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Distribution: world Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 30 Hi! I have a problem and I'm not sure I believe what I see. I have an ethernet with disparate tcp's around on it. We have bsd 4.3, Symbolics, Sun release 3.2, Micom np100 board running tcp among others. I'm in the middle of changing network numbers. Now, networks on the same ethernet won't talk to each other. It seems as if IP wants to have one network number per ethernet. I really don't see why this should be so. Is this the way of IP? Does it really want one network number per ethernet? Is there an RFC that says this should be so? If so then which one so I can go look? If it isn't IP is it the the perversity of ethernet interface manufacturers? USnail: Chris Johnson Academic Computer Services Northeastern University 39RI 360 Huntington Ave. Boston, MA. U.S.A. 02115 AT&T: (617) 437-2335 CSNET: johnson@nuhub.acs.northeastern.edu ARPANET: johnson%nuhub.acs.northeastern.edu@relay.cs.net BITNET: johnson%nuhub.acs.northeastern.edu@csnet-relay (Always vote. There may not be anything you want to vote for, but there might be something you want to vote against.)