From: Bruce Williams (bruce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu May 17 2001 - 12:27:55 GMT-3
I am not offended by your comment, but if you knew what we were trying to do
it would not sound as ridiculous as you may think. I apologize for the off
topic post. We can kill this thread now.
Bruce
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew" <arousch@home.com>
To: "Bruce Williams" <bruce@williamsnetworking.com>;
<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 10:59 AM
Subject: Re: Using Public Addresses Internally
> Bruce,
>
> Please tell me you are not in charge of any design that touches paying
> customers ;^) And just a bean counter... :)
>
> Anyway, this entire thread is OT
>
> -A
>
> andrew.rousch,ccnp.ccdp
> .mailto:arousch@home.com
> .
>
> At 10:31 AM 5/17/01 -0400, Bruce Williams wrote:
> >I need enough addresses to accommodate hundreds of customers, each will
need
> >hundred or so different networks and in these networks they will have
over a
> >hundred hosts. I might be able to accommodate that by subnetting 10.0.0.0
> >and then if necessary subnetting 172.16.0.0 and then 192.168.0.0, but my
> >boss believes it will be easier to use Class A space 1.0.0.0 to 126.0.0.0
> >that way they can have a cookie cutter method of assigning IP addresses.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: <andrew.2.shore@bt.com>
> >To: <bruce@williamsnetworking.com>; <David.Halaska@getronics.com>;
> ><ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 10:20 AM
> >Subject: RE: Using Public Addresses Internally
> >
> >
> > > ?????? ever thought of subnetting ?
> > >
> > >
> > > Andrew Shore
> > > BTcd
> > > IDC Technical Specialist
> > > > ignite Content Hosting
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Bruce Williams [mailto:bruce@williamsnetworking.com]
> > > Sent: 17 May 2001 15:12
> > > To: Halaska, David; ccielab
> > > Subject: Re: Using Public Addresses Internally
> > >
> > >
> > > We need much more address space than that.
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Halaska, David" <David.Halaska@getronics.com>
> > > To: "'Bruce Williams'" <bruce@williamsnetworking.com>;
> > > <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 10:16 AM
> > > Subject: RE: Using Public Addresses Internally
> > >
> > >
> > > > Could you use the 10.x.x.x class A range that is reserved for
private
> >use?
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Bruce Williams [mailto:bruce@williamsnetworking.com]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 8:56 AM
> > > > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > Subject: Using Public Addresses Internally
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > My company wants to use public addresses from the Class A range
> > > internally.
> > > > I
> > > > realize the danger if these routes got advertised on the Internet,
but
> >is
> > > > this
> > > > something that is considered acceptable if it is carefully done to
> >prevent
> > > > the
> > > > risk of these routes being propagated out on the Public Internet?
These
> > > > networks will be used to address equipment in a multitude of
cellular
> > > radio
> > > > base stations around the country and they will only be connected to
our
> > > > network. There will central locations where users from the internet
> >could
> > > > access a database which will query these systems, but there will not
be
> >a
> > > > direct internet connection. I would appreciate any advice on this.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Bruce Williams
> > > > 215-275-2723
> > > > bruce@williamsnetworking.com
> > > > **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
> > > **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
> >**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
> **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:30:43 GMT-3