Ben I forgot to mention that part. Yes this fellow does set all networks up as 10.0.0.0/8 even when there are only 3 computers on the network. Apparently there are many others that do it because it looks and feels better to them. AKA the idiots network...
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 9:51 AM, Ben Dailey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> "Andrew Latham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 11/21/08 3:03 PM >>> > Ben, you are on topic here and the issue is that the design of > networks is sometimes left to looks and feels. I know one consultant > that lives in Ft. Wayne that only uses a 10.0.0.0 network no mater > what size business it is. I talk to people who from working with > people like this that select "vanity" IP addressing schemes that later > become an issue. The issue is that the RFC states an idea and how to > get to this idea. Each manufacturer and then the person setting up > have a responsibility to continue these ideas for interoperability. > > Wow that was much easier than my first rant... > > Andrew, > > You can't say using a 10.0.0.0 network all the time is a bad thing because > you didn't give enough information to make this determination? You didn't > give a network mask. If he always uses 10.0.0.0/8 or 255.0.0.0 then this is a > bad idea but if he is using CIDR complaint equipment with a 10.0.0.0/24 or > 255.255.255.0 mask or even possibly a larger mask creating a network small > than a class C in private address space though doing this a whole different > debate. > > Thanks, > Ben > > _______________________________________________ > Fwlug mailing list > [email protected] > http://fortwaynelug.org/mailman/listinfo/fwlug_fortwaynelug.org > -- Andrew "lathama" Latham TuxTone Inc. http://TuxTone.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Fwlug mailing list [email protected] http://fortwaynelug.org/mailman/listinfo/fwlug_fortwaynelug.org
