--Am Freitag, 4. Februar 2011 08:15 -0500 Tony Graziano <[email protected]> schrieb:
> Yes. His local subnet is not in a private "acceptable" range. He needs to > define it. If there's "magic" about private subnets you may consider adding 192.0.2.0/24, 198.51.100.0/24 and 203.0.113.0/24. These are also somewhat "private" according to RFC5737 -> <http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc5737> <quote> The blocks 192.0.2.0/24 (TEST-NET-1), 198.51.100.0/24 (TEST-NET-2), and 203.0.113.0/24 (TEST-NET-3) are provided for use in documentation. </quote> I used these networks since the three other common private networks as defined in RFC1918 are used more or less and I would like to avoid using them. -- Claas Hilbrecht http://www.jucs-kramkiste.de _______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
