One backbone, two interfaces
What are the implications of connecting both ethernet interfaces of a dual ethernet router to one ethernet backbone? The router interfaces are on seperate IP networks. Occasionally my devices get IP conflicts and they name the router's MAC as the conflicting device. Swtiched environment, no broadcast forwarding enabled. Dave Robinson End to End Networks Inc.
RFC 2260
Has anyone out there found ISP's who will support RFC 2260 section 5.2?
Net police
I hear that people aren't passing prefixes longer than /20. Is this true, and how broadly is this being implemented? If I wanted to advertise my own IP space (say a /24) instead of space provided by my ISP, would many ISP's not pass my route because of prefix length? Dave
BGP AS
Hi all, What do I need to get an AS on the Internet? Money, a certain number of IP's, the right ISP? Does anyone have specifics? Thanks, Dave
Multi-homing
Which RFC's can I read to explain multi-homing to me. I need to do unequal cost load-balancing over two ISP's. Any RFC's or helpful input would be much appreciated... Thanks, Dave
Default free zone
Can anybody explain what the "default free" zone of the Internet is or provide some documentation on what it is? Thanks, Dave
RE: NATs *ARE* evil!
What's the problem with locally significant addresses? Having thousands of 10 networks will never present a problem unless those networks at some point would like to talk to each other. Is that where this whole discussion is going (or coming from) - that ultimately the more NAT'ing we do, the more headaches we're creating for ourselves en route to true global connectivity? Dave -Original Message- From: Keith Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 10:56 AM To: Dave Robinson Cc: Keith Moore; M Dev; Sean Doran; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: NATs *ARE* evil! because in a NATted network the same addresses are used in different parts of the network. addresses are meaningless.
RE: NATs *ARE* evil!
How does the idea of NAT destroy the global Internet address space? -Original Message- From: Keith Moore [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 4:05 AM To: M Dev Cc: Sean Doran; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: NATs *ARE* evil! the problems with NAT are not generally due to implementation. they are inherent in the very idea of NAT, which destroys the global Internet address space. Keith
