----- Original Message ----- From: "Butch Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 02, 2006 10:44 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Routed vs bridged (again)...

On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Marlon K. Schafer wrote:

It's a very high cost. Why does every residential user need to tie up 3 ip addys? How long can we keep handing them out like that before we run into trouble again? There is only so much nat that we're gonna get away with.

I give up...why does a residential user need 3 ips? I never suggested that they did. And I guess I don't understand what nat has to do with any of it.

OK, what's the minimum number of ip addys that a routed customer HAS to use? I thought it was three. Is it really two or four instead? Either way, it's a waste of ip addresses.

NAT matters because it's the only way many of us would ever get enough ip addys for every customer AND every device on the network. For customers that increasinly need two way communications NAT isn't a good option.

Then there's the CALEA crap. How in the world is a person going to track EVERY packet in his network? And those doing NAT may well have to as ALL customers behind a nat'd address show up as the one public addy. That's not gonna help anyone find that Kiddie porn freak. So what will we have to do to comply? Don't know for sure yet, but I certinly think that it'll be much easier to deal with the issue if every customer has a public ip.

No...not a requirement.  It's just a more scalable solution.

There are nearly 4000 (unfortunately not all mine :-) 100meg customers on that network.

I don't want to argue this point, because I just don't have enough information about the network. I seriously doubt, though, that all those customers are all on a single /20 network (which would support 4096 hosts). Even worse, if there are routers there, too, it may need a /19 (which would accomodate over 8000 customers). If they are not, take my word for it...they are routed.

They are routed to the world at the isp. But they are NOT routed within the network. They are vlan'd. Some isp's may have multiple vlans or some such thing, but I'd be surprised at that.

I'm just saying that it's far less important than it used to be.

With the proliferation of worms being what it is, and most of them spreading by broadcast to the local network? You must be kidding...

Nope. We block client to client communications at the ap (and hopefully soon at the switch). The worms can only get sideways on my network by going through the router, which under your theory will block them.

Also, we require all customers have a firewall and antivirus. In theory we actually have several levels of protection in place against just such problems.

OK, I've had enough fun poking at the religious right on the routed vs. bridged debate. The reality of the situation (as with so many things in life) is that both are used and both do a better job if used in the right places. Right tool for the right job. And EVERYONE's job is a different one. The isp has to be able to make smart choices for his network. Talk about all or nothing in either direction isn't really helpful in my mind.

How's that?

Butch Evans
Network Engineering and Security Consulting
Mikrotik Certified Consultant
WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org


Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to