On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Andrew Latham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I know that companies and organizations will continue to use > addressing that _looks_ or _feels_ right. Remember that the _looks_ > and _feels_ can bite you later.
I appreciate your rant in that I wasn't aware that 10.0.0.0/8 is the only standard way to use the 10.*.*.* range of IP addresses. I shall try to remember this in the future. On the other hand, even *thinking* about going through and reconfiguring every single piece of relevant equipment in our possession and then re-training myself not to think of the HS subnet as 10.0.*.* and the MS as 10.1.*.*, etc. is very, very, very, very painful. So, the argument of "Well, the system was here when I've arrived and I've yet to see a problem with it." that I just made in a quote earlier in this sentence is not meant as refutation of your argument about standards and best practices, but as a defense mechanism that allows me to avoid feeling compelled to bring our subnet usage in line with said standards and best practices. The further argument that I will make in the following quote, "So, if my chances of ever seeing this be a problem are less than 50%, and the likely problems I might see would be limited to a specific device or two that I could replace (or just not buy), is it really worth it?", is likewise not aimed at your illuminating rant but at the idea of how much network (computers, phones, e-mail server, web server, etc.) down-time I imagine we would need to inflict on our end-users in the process. </rant> ;-) Simón _______________________________________________ Fwlug mailing list [email protected] http://fortwaynelug.org/mailman/listinfo/fwlug_fortwaynelug.org
