<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Multi-LAN with same gateway]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">hi,</p>
<p dir="auto">if i configure 2 or more LANs with the same gateway, and i'm using the same subnet in all of them will it have the same broadcast domain?</p>
<p dir="auto">thanks</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netgate.com/topic/30722/multi-lan-with-same-gateway</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 19:11:32 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://forum.netgate.com/topic/30722.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 12:01:03 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Multi-LAN with same gateway on Mon, 28 Feb 2011 10:57:36 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Ok, i'm migrating a flat network and using a pfsense as firewall.</p>
<p dir="auto">i have a 3 interfaces box, one for wan, two for "lan".</p>
<p dir="auto">For now i'm using both lans in the same subnet, with same ip. I do assign both ports (interfaces) the same IP. I do it to make easier the network configuration. The DHCP scope, for instance, provides one gateway for all hosts on my network.  So it works like a charm, the problem is that in the end, this two ports are working like a hub. So the solution would be to enable "bridging" in both interfaces, right? But with bridging, can i still using one IP to both interfaces? Or should i create different subnets and assign different ips to both interfaces and keep both port in different subnets? The problem with this option is that it brings an undesirable complexity.</p>
<p dir="auto"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="/user/jimp">@<bdi>jimp</bdi></a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p dir="auto">Then you bridge the interfaces together, not assign them IPs in the same subnet.</p>
</blockquote>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netgate.com/post/267691</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.netgate.com/post/267691</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[josesilva]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 10:57:36 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Multi-LAN with same gateway on Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:35:02 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Then you bridge the interfaces together, not assign them IPs in the same subnet.</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netgate.com/post/266729</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.netgate.com/post/266729</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[jimp]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 21 Feb 2011 15:35:02 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Multi-LAN with same gateway on Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:15:23 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">So in the end, it will behave almost like a hub? The use case is If you want to spare a switch and you have a free network card for example..</p>
<p dir="auto">thanks for your reply.</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netgate.com/post/266339</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.netgate.com/post/266339</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[josesilva]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:15:23 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Multi-LAN with same gateway on Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:13:24 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Why assign multiple interfaces to serve the same network space?  Yes, all machines within the same logical network will share the same broadcast domain, which is another reason not to segregate these network segments on different cards.</p>
]]></description><link>https://forum.netgate.com/post/266336</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://forum.netgate.com/post/266336</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[[[global:guest]]]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 13:13:24 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>