nanog mailing list archives
Re: Exodus / Clue problems
From: Marc Slemko <marcs () znep com>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1998 15:45:11 -0800 (PST)
On Mon, 16 Nov 1998, Phil Howard wrote:
They are using (wasting) the whole 10.0.0.0/8 on one LAN? Sheesh! I've picked 172.30.0.0/16 to be divided up into 16384 /30's to use for numbered links. I'll probably choose another piece of address space
If those numbered links will generate packets (eg. ICMP errors) sourced from 1918 space, then you should not be using 1918 addresses on them and it can break things like Path MTU Discovery. In general, using 1918 addresses for interface addresses when the interface routes public traffic is NOT a good idea unless there are special circumstances. Check the archives; this was discussed to death a few weeks ago.
Current thread:
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems, (continued)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Adam Rothschild (Nov 15)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems James McKenzie (Nov 15)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems James McKenzie (Nov 15)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Adam Rothschild (Nov 15)
- RE: Exodus / Clue problems Adam Rothschild (Nov 15)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Simson L. Garfinkel (Nov 16)
- RE: Exodus / Clue problems John Fraizer (Nov 16)
- RE: Exodus / Clue problems John A. Tamplin (Nov 16)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Daniel Senie (Nov 16)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Phil Howard (Nov 16)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Marc Slemko (Nov 16)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems John Fraizer (Nov 16)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Daniel Senie (Nov 16)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems John Fraizer (Nov 16)
- RE: Exodus / Clue problems Chris Mauritz (Nov 18)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Steve Noble (Nov 18)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Steven J. Sobol (Nov 18)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Steve Noble (Nov 18)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Steven J. Sobol (Nov 18)
- Where has the operational part of Nanog gone? Steve Noble (Nov 18)
- Re: Where has the operational part of Nanog gone? Adam Rothschild (Nov 18)
- Re: Exodus / Clue problems Steve Noble (Nov 18)
