Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 08:04:41 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Vermillion <bill@bilver.magicnet.net> To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Wasting IP's on dedicated lines Message-ID: <199911131304.IAA72501@bilver.magicnet.net>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Nov 13, 1999 at 11:55:13AM +0100, Thus Spake Leif Neland: > We're going to connect several sites througg dedicated lines: > Our site > | > router 100.100.100.1/24 (cisco 2600, channelized E1 (soon)) > modem > | telco lines > modem > router 100.100.101.1/30 (cisco 1005) > | > Fbsd firewall/proxy outside 100.100.101.2/30 > | inside 192.168.0.1/30 > > > This means I'll use 4 ip's for each remote site on the cable between router and firewall: > 100.100.101.0: network > 100.100.101.1: cisco > 100.100.101.2: firewall > 100.100.101.3: broadcast > Next site will use 100.100.101.4 to 100.100.101.7 > This seems rather wastefull. It may be wasteful, but in my view it's almost mandatory if you want to have control. You could run un-numbered on the serial interfaces, and then the only IP's would be on the ethernet. Here's on reason why you want to use the IP's. If at the far side someone disconnects the ethernet cable/hub, you won't be able to telnet to the IP. However by having the serial ports numbered you could telnet to that port and diagnose the problem if the problem was on the ethernet side. Just one more tool for trouble-shooting. I'm really glad I have it. Currently I have 11 T1s outgoing this way. > BTW, Does somebody sell cheap cisco's on the net? Don't know about on the net, but you can get the phone number/address from www.networkhardware.com. We'be bought at six 2501's from him. Many Adtrans. Ascend Max4004. Good prices. Everything just as specified Bill -- Bill Vermillion bv @ wjv.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199911131304.IAA72501>