I need to setup two computers with the same ip in the same subnet

This is the problem:


I've got two computers in the same subnet. Computer A with two
network cards and computer B with just one. I need to install a
software licensed to an ip address. This ip address is used by one
computer (Computer A).

Computer A/Windows: eth0 10.10.0.10
Computer B/Linux: eth0 10.10.0.15
---------------------------- netfilter/iptables
eth1 10.10.0.10


If I setup iptables in order to hide the B/eth1 from the rest of
the subnet, all the services are unreachable. The problem is that I
need to drop all the arp requests too. If I configure eth1 with
'ifconfig eth1 -arp' when any computer in the subnet pings 10.10.0.10
the arp table is filled for that address (10.10.0.10) with the
B/eth0's physical address (MAC)... ¿¿??? Why?


I've got a big mess. Anybody can help me? Thanks.

On Thursday July 10, 2003 at 03:30
(E-Mail Removed) (zido) wrote:

> This is the problem:
>
>
> I've got two computers in the same subnet. Computer A with two
> network cards and computer B with just one. I need to install a
> software licensed to an ip address. This ip address is used by one
> computer (Computer A).

If I follow you correctly, your looking to install software or
computer:b that you only have a license for on computer:a. Is it just
me, or is this illegal?

--
-johann koenig
now playing: MxPx - Tomorrow's Another Day
Today is Sweetmorn, the 45th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3169
My public pgp key: http://mental-graffiti.com/pgp/johannkoenig.pgp

(E-Mail Removed) (zido) wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed). com>...
> This is the problem:
>
>
> I've got two computers in the same subnet. Computer A with two
> network cards and computer B with just one. I need to install a
> software licensed to an ip address. This ip address is used by one
> computer (Computer A).
>
> Computer A/Windows: eth0 10.10.0.10
> Computer B/Linux: eth0 10.10.0.15
> ---------------------------- netfilter/iptables
> eth1 10.10.0.10
>
>
> If I setup iptables in order to hide the B/eth1 from the rest of
> the subnet, all the services are unreachable. The problem is that I
> need to drop all the arp requests too. If I configure eth1 with
> 'ifconfig eth1 -arp' when any computer in the subnet pings 10.10.0.10
> the arp table is filled for that address (10.10.0.10) with the
> B/eth0's physical address (MAC)... ¿¿??? Why?
>
>
> I've got a big mess. Anybody can help me? Thanks.

If you need install a software like this, it sound like you are trying
to break your EULA. Can't condone this action, sorry.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Johann Koenig wrote:
> (E-Mail Removed) (zido) wrote:
>> I've got two computers in the same subnet. Computer A with two
>> network cards and computer B with just one. I need to install a
>> software licensed to an ip address. This ip address is used by one
>
> If I follow you correctly, your looking to install software or
> computer:b that you only have a license for on computer:a. Is it just
> me, or is this illegal?

Probably so, but it is an interesting situation. The best advice of
course is to eliminate one's dependence upon proprietary software.

Back to the OP's attempt to violate his software license: I don't think
you can do it with both in the same subnet. I think you need to put a
router between them. If the 2 machines with the same IP need to talk to
one another, this might be done via NAT on the router. The dual-homed
Linux box cannot use the real IP of the Windows box, because its route
table will see that as belonging to a local interface.

BTW IIUC it might not need to have 2 NIC's for this. This sounds like a
good use for the "dummy" net driver. (The router of course needs 2
NIC's.)
--
/dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+28))@softhome.net
or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply

On Thursday July 10, 2003 at 09:21
/dev/rob0 <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> Johann Koenig wrote:
> > (E-Mail Removed) (zido) wrote:
> >> I've got two computers in the same subnet. Computer A with two
> >> network cards and computer B with just one. I need to install a
> >> software licensed to an ip address. This ip address is used by one
> >
> > If I follow you correctly, your looking to install software or
> > computer:b that you only have a license for on computer:a. Is it
> > just me, or is this illegal?
>
> Probably so, but it is an interesting situation. The best advice of
> course is to eliminate one's dependence upon proprietary software.
>
> Back to the OP's attempt to violate his software license: I don't
> think you can do it with both in the same subnet. I think you need to
> put a router between them. If the 2 machines with the same IP need to
> talk to one another, this might be done via NAT on the router. The
> dual-homed Linux box cannot use the real IP of the Windows box,
> because its route table will see that as belonging to a local
> interface.
>
> BTW IIUC it might not need to have 2 NIC's for this. This sounds like
> a good use for the "dummy" net driver. (The router of course needs 2
> NIC's.)

I think what he wants is the card to exist for the software to verify,
but not be able to communicate with the rest of the network. However,
I'm not sure how said software verifies itself. Does it just check if
the address exists, or does it communicate with a verification database?

I've never heard of verification by IP address before, but I don't deal
much with proprietary software since I switched to Debian.
--
-johann koenig
now playing: The Ataris - On With The Show
Today is Sweetmorn, the 45th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3169
My public pgp key: http://mental-graffiti.com/pgp/johannkoenig.pgp

you're right. But it's all absolutely legal. The matter is the
computer B is a test computer and the computer A is a computer with
users accessing it. Until we do the migration I don't want to change
anything in computer A (with windows os and application servers with
ip based configuration), and meanwhile I need a test computer (the
tests might last months). And after this explanation I wonder if you
have an answer to my question or if you were bored.

For other people with the same problem I think there's a clue here :
http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&...g%26start%3D25

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Johann Koenig wrote:
>> BTW IIUC it might not need to have 2 NIC's for this. This sounds like
>> a good use for the "dummy" net driver. (The router of course needs 2
>> NIC's.)
>
> I think what he wants is the card to exist for the software to verify,
> but not be able to communicate with the rest of the network. However,

Chances are that it won't care about the card per se. If it just uses an
ifconfig-like means of listing active interfaces, "dummy" would do the
job.

> I'm not sure how said software verifies itself. Does it just check if
> the address exists, or does it communicate with a verification database?

Yeah, I don't know either. IAC it sounds nasty.

> I've never heard of verification by IP address before, but I don't deal
> much with proprietary software since I switched to Debian.

Unfortunately I do have to deal with some here and there. But I'd tell
my clients not to risk using any unlicensed proprietary software.
--
/dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+28))@softhome.net
or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply

zido wrote:
>
> you're right. But it's all absolutely legal. The matter is the
> computer B is a test computer and the computer A is a computer with
> users accessing it. Until we do the migration I don't want to change
> anything in computer A (with windows os and application servers with
> ip based configuration), and meanwhile I need a test computer (the
> tests might last months).

In which case you can contact the vendor and ask for a temporary license
for your test box. It it's legal and within their terms they will
oblige.

Regards, Ian

zido wrote:

> I've got a big mess. Anybody can help me? Thanks.
>

Well, you could buy an additional licence, so you don't have to ask on the
internet, for help in cheating the software supplier.

--

Fundamentalism is fundamentally wrong.

To reply to this message, replace everything to the left of "@" with
james.knott.

(E-Mail Removed) (zido) wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed). com>...
> you're right. But it's all absolutely legal. The matter is the
> computer B is a test computer and the computer A is a computer with
> users accessing it. Until we do the migration I don't want to change
> anything in computer A (with windows os and application servers with
> ip based configuration), and meanwhile I need a test computer (the
> tests might last months). And after this explanation I wonder if you
> have an answer to my question or if you were bored.

Yes, I am bored; otherwise, I won't bother with other people's
problem.

>
> For other people with the same problem I think there's a clue here :
> http://groups.google.com/groups?dq=&...g%26start%3D25

This is advanced routing with two nic on same segment.

You are adding another nic with same IP in addition to that. Two mac
addresses with same IP is definitely not acceptable. My suggestion is
to take your test machine off the net while running this apps.