From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Feb 16 11:40:48 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from smtp04.primenet.com (smtp04.primenet.com [206.165.6.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03DE037B401 for ; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 11:40:46 -0800 (PST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA03717; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:35:14 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr05.primenet.com(206.165.6.205) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpdAAAn7aqbh; Fri Feb 16 12:34:57 2001 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA06372; Fri, 16 Feb 2001 12:40:14 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <200102161940.MAA06372@usr05.primenet.com> Subject: Re: Reserved IP Addresses To: crh@outpost.co.nz (Craig Harding) Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 19:40:14 +0000 (GMT) Cc: treznor@sunflower.com, chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <3A8C809C.E01A7B8C@outpost.co.nz> from "Craig Harding" at Feb 16, 2001 02:21:32 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > I happen to know for a fact (from talking to my friend who runs a local > ISP) that Telecom NZ uses 192.168.x.x addresses internally for various > parts of their ADSL network, and even have things sufficiently > misconfigured to announce those addresses into his router (which caused > him great surprise initially, he couldn't figure out why the office > machines on a 192.168.x.x subnet behind NAT suddenly couldn't talk to > anything - Telecom had announced a route for that subnet). Which begs the question: why did his router accept those announcements, considering that the addresses are non-routable? Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message