RE: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? (fwd)

[John Fraizer <nanog () EnterZone Net>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 21:54:10 -0500
From: Wants to keep their Job <xxxx () bellsouth net>
To: John Fraizer <nanog () EnterZone Net>
Subject: RE: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN?

Typical, indeed.  *sigh*

BellSouth.  Telco Heads, running Telco Products.  Let's squeeze this 
Internet thing into a two-pound telco bag and hope it doesn't squirt out of 
the sides...  L'idiote de telco... :)

I'd take up a collection to buy this guy a clue, but if anyone found out it 
was a Bell Head, no one would give!


At 07:01 PM 12/29/00, you wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Deron J. Ringen wrote:
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]On Behalf Of
> > > Simon Lyall
> > > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 3:03 PM
> > > To: nanog () merit edu
> > > Subject: Re: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN?
> > .
> > .
> > > One of the companies we work with has 192.168 address for some of the
> > > radius servers we have to talk to, we are directly connected to them so
> > > it's not a big pain but it's just so ugly.
> > .
> > .
> > That makes perfect sense to me...there is not a better way to protect a box
> > from a DOS/hack than to only give it a private address.   Why expose a box
> > to the outside world if there is not a need???
>
> Deron,
>
> Ever heard of an access list?  Didn't think so.
>
> > Deron J. Ringen
> > Sr. Network Architect
> > BellSouth Internet Services
>
> Typical.
>
> ---
> John Fraizer
> EnterZone, Inc