[33111] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Deron J. Ringen)
Fri Dec 29 16:22:51 2000
From: "Deron J. Ringen" <djr@eng.bellsouth.net>
To: "Simon Lyall" <simon.lyall@ihug.co.nz>, <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 16:19:23 -0500
Message-ID: <NEBBLOMNADAAGMHJKLDCCECACHAA.djr@eng.bellsouth.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0012300853170.639-100000@boggle.ihug.co.nz>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of
> Simon Lyall
> Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 3:03 PM
> To: nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: Re: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN?
.
.
> One of the companies we work with has 192.168 address for some of the
> radius servers we have to talk to, we are directly connected to them so
> it's not a big pain but it's just so ugly.
.
.
That makes perfect sense to me...there is not a better way to protect a box
from a DOS/hack than to only give it a private address. Why expose a box
to the outside world if there is not a need???
Deron J. Ringen
Sr. Network Architect
BellSouth Internet Services
