So, here's my 'interfaces' definion:
ethernet eth1 {
address 192.168.0.1/24
description Local
duplex auto
poe {
output off
}
speed auto
}
ethernet eth2 {
description "Local 2"
duplex auto
poe {
output off
}
speed auto
}
ethernet eth3 {
description "Local 2"
duplex auto
poe {
output off
}
speed auto
}
ethernet eth4 {
description "Local 2"
duplex auto
poe {
output off
}
speed auto
}
loopback lo {
}
switch switch0 {
address 192.168.1.1/24
description "Local 2"
mtu 1500
switch-port {
interface eth2
interface eth3
interface eth4
}
}
I tried 'connecting' eth1 to '192.168.1.1', and the cli wouldn't let me do that because that address is already defined by the switch statement (I think). Ah... I think I just answered my own question. So If I want to 'fix' my configuration for eth1 to 'use' 192.168.1.1 (along with eth2/3/4), I'd delete the eth1 'address' statement, change the Description fields for eth2/3/4 to just 'Local', and then add 'interface eth1' to the switch-port section.
Except, eth1 isn't in the 'switch' group... So, If I want all this to be connected to the same LAN, I'll have to bridge eth1 to eth2/3/4. I'm guessing I'd be better off (throughput wise) to just not use eth2/3/4, and redefine eth1 to be 192.168.1.1.....