On Thursday 3 October 2002, at 12 h 23,
Scott Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not sure how applicable it may be, but the OpenBSD FAQ has referenced (since
at least 2.7) a paper called Understanding IP Addressing that I found to =
be
pretty useful.
Iljitsch van Beijnum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But not allowing BGP - IGP - BGP might be a good one. On the other hand,
someone who is determined to screw up could do BGP - IGP on one router
and IGP - BGP on another.
I've seen that done. And usefully. The case involved an AGS+ (BGP
I tend to favour allowing features rather than restricting them, if paranoia is
needed then perhaps a confirm prompt?
Dont forget tho BGP is used for things other than Internet routing eg VPN, VRF
and in those cases I can imagine such redistributions being beneficial.
Steve
On Mon, 7 Oct
Proxy arp will still send the data thro the other router tho, the only
difference is now router B believes router A to be the destination
station. Seems like your worse off than you were before. (Plus I hate proxy arp
in non-SOHO environments!)
Steve
--
Stephen J. Wilcox
BSc (Hons), CCNA,
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, David Luyer wrote:
But not allowing BGP - IGP - BGP might be a good one. On the other hand,
someone who is determined to screw up could do BGP - IGP on one router
and IGP - BGP on another.
I've seen that done. And usefully.
But it's just too dangerous.
Any
Ok, so correct me if I'm wrong here (I'm just trying to paint a picture
of what this thread is trying to conceive), RA-FA1: 10.10.10.1/30,
RB-FA0: 10.10.10.2/30, 172.16.16.1/24 secondary?
iBGP setup between RA RB, RB announces to RA with a next-hop of the
primary address on FA0, RA announces
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
When you setup a secondary ip on an interface
int fa0/0
ip address a.b.c.d e.f.g.h secondary
How does it determine where to send the packets? ARP.
Which is the same as adding the route described above.
From what I've read so far, it looks
A and B are connected via the same multi-access media. It is technically
possible for B to tell A you can reach 172.16.16.0/24 on the same media
that you receive this update on. However what people seem to be saying
is that there is no dynamic routing protocol that implements this.
Nope,
Hi there,
What really confuses the heck out of me is that a company this size can't
control/monitor their change management??. Then again not having all the
facts has had everyone perplexed.
It really should not confuse you. At least one year ago, there had been a
Very Large company
Manually configuring a static route in router A would achieve the result:
ip route 172.16.16.0 255.255.255.0 fa0/0
Why are we doing basic IP routing 101 on NANOG?
OK, since it's so basic why don't you explain how to have router A
dynamically learn from router B that there is a
I guess I don't know this because I've never tried it. But, how does the
router determine where to send the packets for a route statement as
specified above (ip route a.b.c.d e.f.g.h f0/0) ?
When you setup a secondary ip on an interface
int fa0/0
ip address a.b.c.d e.f.g.h
Ok, so correct me if I'm wrong here (I'm just trying to paint a picture
of what this thread is trying to conceive), RA-FA1: 10.10.10.1/30,
RB-FA0: 10.10.10.2/30, 172.16.16.1/24 secondary?
iBGP setup between RA RB, RB announces to RA with a next-hop of the
primary address on FA0, RA
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 11:40:11PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
Manually configuring a static route in router A would achieve the result:
ip route 172.16.16.0 255.255.255.0 fa0/0
However, I'm surprised that there's no dynamic routing protocol that
allows you to do everything you can with
On Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Vicky O. Mair wrote:
What really confuses the heck out of me is that a company this size can't
control/monitor their change management??. Then again not having all the
facts has had everyone perplexed.
Actually I believe they have very good change management. Change
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 09:49:28AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Thursday 3 October 2002, at 12 h 23,
Scott Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not sure how applicable it may be, but the OpenBSD FAQ has referenced (since
at least 2.7) a paper called Understanding IP Addressing that I
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 11:40:11PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
Manually configuring a static route in router A would achieve the result:
ip route 172.16.16.0 255.255.255.0 fa0/0
However, I'm surprised that there's no dynamic routing protocol
-Original Message-
From: Scott Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 10:56 AM
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Good quotes on importance of good network addressing
On Mon, Oct 07, 2002 at 09:49:28AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Can someone please explain to me *why* are you trying to come up with
*complicated* configurations as opposite to
(a) defining your connected routes on all the routers that would be using
it.
I've asked because I wanted to know if any routing protocol redistributes
information about
...so what exactly did we(AOL) do to get referenced
in this email thread?
Cleve...
Cleve Mickles
Network Architecture
America Online, Network Operations
On 10/5/2002 at 12:30:36 +, Tim Thorne said:
After reading all the stories about what supposedly happened does
anyone know what really happened? Did UUNet US really do an IOS
upgrade on a sizable proportion of their border routers in one go?
This seems like suicide to me. What possible
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Majdi S. Abbas wrote:
Ralph, how do you intend on getting traffic *OUT* of this subnet?
Static arp entries on all the hosts? Proxy arp? It seems like that would
be a lot more work and much more failure prone in the
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
It seems pretty obvious to me that if you have a an ethernet segment with
multiple routers on it that adding a secondary IP to each one is more
complicated and error-prone than adding it to one and having a dynamic
routing protocol notify the rest
On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 14:16:43 CDT, Pete Templin said:
They are dynamic routing protocols, not dynamic gateway-creation
protocols. You're asking iBGP to create an interface. iBGP (and other
dynamic routing protocols) don't do that.
I suppose they *could* - the fun then starts when you get a
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
[from previous mail]
Ralph, how do you intend on getting traffic *OUT* of this subnet?
Static arp entries on all the hosts? Proxy arp? It seems like that would
On Mon, 07 Oct 2002 15:37:16 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suppose they *could* - the fun then starts when you get a routing flap and
the other router tells you that you're not on one subnet because the subnet
is unreachable and would you please remove the interface? And I'm willing
to
The assumption that it was untested is probably an unfair one. Once a
network reaches a certain size, it is very difficult to simulate it in
a lab. Number of routes/updates, variety of packet destinations,
different card revisions and layouts... heck, even statistically, you
have
to that end why doesnt bind ship with default zone files for rfc1918 space as
well as 127.0.0.0 ?
Steve
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Paul Vixie wrote:
since the last time we cleared the firewall statistics on c.root-servers.net,
1895GB of udp/53 input has led to 6687GB of udp/53 output, but, and
And to that end, I wonder how many of the bad queries are coming from MS
DNS servers.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Stephen J. Wilcox
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2002 7:05 PM
To: Paul Vixie
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re:
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
And to that end, I wonder how many of the bad queries are coming from MS
DNS servers.
to that end, i wonder how many of the bad queries are coming directly from
microsoft campus.
-Dan
--
[-] Omae no subete no kichi wa ore no mono da. [-]
Hope this doesn't come across as DNS-101, but is there some way to tell
what DNS server one uses? Kinda like telnetting to port 80 or 25? I
know if it is possible, it's just as possible for them to change the
output, but chances are the brainiacs of the world who don't filter
probably aren't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: MD5
Hello Jason,
Monday, October 7, 2002, 7:14:41 PM, you wrote:
JL Hope this doesn't come across as DNS-101, but is there some way to tell
JL what DNS server one uses? Kinda like telnetting to port 80 or 25? I
JL know if it is possible, it's just
For those with no prior experience in IP addressing, it can provide a nice
bit of historical background. While classful addressing may be passe,
knowing one's history never hurts.
especially as we see echos of mistakes past being made in the v6 model,
assigning large blocks, /64
On Sun, 6 Oct 2002, Clayton Fiske wrote:
On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 04:25:00PM -0400, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
A and B are connected via the same multi-access media. It is technically
possible for B to tell A you can reach 172.16.16.0/24 on the same media
that you receive this update on.
33 matches
Mail list logo
