From owner-freebsd-chat Thu Feb 15 7:27:26 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72BB037B4EC for ; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 07:27:22 -0800 (PST) Received: (from des@localhost) by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA09069; Thu, 15 Feb 2001 16:27:18 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from des@ofug.org) X-URL: http://www.ofug.org/~des/ X-Disclaimer: The views expressed in this message do not necessarily coincide with those of any organisation or company with which I am or have been affiliated. To: David Scheidt Cc: Craig Harding , chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Reserved IP Addresses References: From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Date: 15 Feb 2001 16:27:18 +0100 In-Reply-To: David Scheidt's message of "Thu, 15 Feb 2001 09:08:10 -0600 (CST)" Message-ID: Lines: 12 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0802 (Gnus v5.8.2) Emacs/20.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org David Scheidt writes: > I don't see a problem here. Is this route supposed to be directly > accessable outside of their network? If it's behind their border routers, > and not for use outside hte netwok, a private network address is quite > reasonable. No, it's not reasonable to use such addresses for equipment that is visible from the outside. DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message