FC1 multiple ethernet interface issue

[David Benigni]

>>> rchiodin at bellsouth.net 2/15/2005 11:35:01 AM >>>
>
> I suspect that the moving of the default route to eth1 and the
removing
> of the default route when eth1 is taken down has to do with the
lookup
> of the subnet associated with the router and the interface.  The
default
> route disappears because the interface with the router's subnet goes
> down.  The matching algorithm does not take into account that there
is
> another interface on the same subnet.  It might be a bug, but most
> systems are not configured with two interfaces in the same subnet
> without some sort of bonding or bridging.

This wouldn't be the first time I'm doing something that is out of the
norm :)

> I've tried to sort out Dave's posting (fix your email client to not
> create a new email thread for each response) and conclude that there
is
>one particular host he wants to communicate with on one of the
>interfaces and everyone else on the other.  Why, and is this host
>directly connected?  It might be easier to burn a private subnet for
>this one host and let linux be it's default gateway (NAT and ip
>forwarding).

Sorry about the email client, I'm pretty much stuck thought (Novell
GroupWise).  

Hears the story of what I'm trying to do.  This box runs DHCPd and
bind.  For legacy reasons, I have to bind multiple
ips to the box for an unknown amount of machines that are hard coded to
the old ip address.  So, initial (and possibly
flawed) though was to have the new ip I want to roll out 10.x.y.107
bound to eth0 and bind 10.x.y.114 to eth1.
Then when all the legacy systems are fixed, I can easily just down
eth1.  I'd rather mess with eth1 since its not so
critical as eth0. 

So, thats the situation.  Any ideas are welcomed. 

Thanks,
Dave