> -----Original Message-----
> From: fooler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 12:49 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [plug] linux flavors
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ronneil Camara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, July 02, 2000 10:17 PM
> Subject: RE: [plug] linux flavors
>
>
> > There is!
>
> and what section of rfc 1918 did it violate? :->
>
> > Do you think I will be able to receive an ICMP ECHO REPLY when I
> > ping those IP addresses 192.168.100.18 and 192.168.100.5?
> Of course not!
>
> here's my ping results:
>
> Microsoft Windows 2000 [Version 5.00.2195]
> (C) Copyright 1985-1999 Microsoft Corp.
>
> C:\>ping 192.168.100.18
>
> Pinging 192.168.100.18 with 32 bytes of data:
>
> Reply from 192.168.100.18: bytes=32 time=422ms TTL=26
> Reply from 192.168.100.18: bytes=32 time=172ms TTL=26
> Reply from 192.168.100.18: bytes=32 time=156ms TTL=26
> Reply from 192.168.100.18: bytes=32 time=125ms TTL=26
>
> Ping statistics for 192.168.100.18:
> Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
> Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
> Minimum = 125ms, Maximum = 422ms, Average = 218ms
>
> C:\>
>
> why i can ping and at your site cant? :-> the answer is in
> the rfc 1918. :->
>
If I were you, don't test it from your site. Conduct the test from another
ISP.
I've tested it already from my 2 isp account, 3 corporate accounts. And it
said,
destination host unreachable.
If you are really firm with your belief, then go on. I won't stop you.
Not unless someone here or from PH-ISP mailing list corrects me. Then that's
the time I will flush everything I know RE TCP/IP.
Let's stop it. We're not helping the other PLUGgers. Let's just answer other
POST.
Is it ok with you? :-)
Thanks
Onie
-
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
