Re: NAT addresses - RFC or tradition?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 22 May 2007, Tim Evans wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2007 16:46:25 -0300, Andre Guimarães wrote
It's quite simple.
You're using public IPs in your internal networks.
Some of these IPs may exist and have an owner an maybe even a web site.
You'll be in trouble in the day you wish to acess one of these IPs
on the internet because you won't reach them because you have them
on your network and so won't route the packets to the internet.

In other words, the RFC addresses are specifically for use in internal
networks, since they are guaranteed not to be used on the public internet, and
not routed to by any public internet router.


"should not" be publically routed, there are itiots out there in the world, one can't fix stupid.

Thanks,

Ron DuFresne
- -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
        admin & senior security consultant:  sysinfo.com
                        http://sysinfo.com
Key fingerprint = 9401 4B13 B918 164C 647A  E838 B2DF AFCC 94B0 6629

...We waste time looking for the perfect lover
instead of creating the perfect love.

                -Tom Robbins <Still Life With Woodpecker>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGdsCGst+vzJSwZikRAvYIAJ0fFaAVU0xlLtkL6S4XJqEZcYrlMgCcDEf3
qsBjsVnL0PyYWgl5ingpEPw=
=IssI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Netfilter Development]     [Linux Kernel Networking Development]     [Netem]     [Berkeley Packet Filter]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Advanced Routing & Traffice Control]     [Bugtraq]

  Powered by Linux