On Wednesday, 04/06/2005 at 09:49 EST, Harold Grovesteen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So there are no technical limitations prohibiting the intentions of the > original poster. One man's "unnatural" is another man's knowing when or > when not to violate a rule of thumb. The latter being a non-technical > consideration. If the networking people are worth their salt, IMO, they > would code both the old subnet and the new subnet on the switch port > anyway to allow a graceful migration of the guests from the old subnet > to the new subnet so that a "flash cut" of the network and all guests > are not required at one time. That would certainly allow the new guests > to be immediately implemented while the old ones migrate on their own > schedule to the new subnet. Then the only question would really be, does > the old subnet go away or stay, a potentially separate question.
Would that technology was the primary limiting factor. I often get questions about whether you "can" do something or not, but more often than not (based on the questions I see), it turns out that a more appropriate word would have been "may" or "should". So, perhaps a better answer to the OP would have been: "Take the problem to your networking people and ask them to help you solve it. The networking technology and standards DO permit multiple networks on a LAN segment, but it is unconventional and may violate your networking or security policies. Some will reject the idea on moral grounds. :-)" Given that the goodwill of your networking people is vital, I don't think I'd lay on the railroad tracks on this one. :-) Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
