From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Apr 17 13:10:35 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4045C37B401
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 13:10:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exchange.wan.no (exchange.wan.no [80.86.128.88])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C3FC43FAF
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 13:10:29 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from sten.daniel.sorsdal@wan.no)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6249.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 22:10:18 +0200
Message-ID: <0AF1BBDF1218F14E9B4CCE414744E70F07DE92@exchange.wanglobal.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: Userland PPP/PPTP tunneling problem
Thread-Index: AcMFGuHCtHLJjCOSRQeaZW8Yp0OwLAAAHO8Q
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sten_Daniel_S=F8rsdal?= <sten.daniel.sorsdal@wan.no>
To: "Brett Glass" <brett@lariat.org>, "Bill Fumerola" <billf@mu.org>
cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject: RE: Userland PPP/PPTP tunneling problem
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 20:10:35 -0000

>=20
> At 01:26 PM 4/17/2003, Bill Fumerola wrote:
>  =20
> >> I don't understand. Why is /24 more "natural" than /16?
> >
> >because that address is in class C space, not class B. read rfc791.
>=20
> As I understand it, that portion of RFC791 was obsolete decades ago.
> (Even if it weren't, you should be able to subdivide the
> address space.)
>=20
> --Brett

The PPTP protocol allows it (I might be wrong!), the Microsoft PPTP =
client does not.
It's just a minor problem with this otherwise administrativly easy way =
of tunneling.
Interesting really, considering Microsoft developed PPTP.

If you are going to do this on a large scale, you could use Connection =
Manager to build the
Profile and add a small batch script to add the route as the tunnel is =
being created.


- Sten