nanog mailing list archives
RE: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN?
From: "Deron J. Ringen" <djr () eng bellsouth net>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 09:02:37 -0500
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.this is a common fantasy. changing the its license place does not change the vulnerability of your car to an accident. randy
True...but parking your car in a garage as opposed to on the street does make it less vulnerable to theft. ...djr...
Current thread:
- RE: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN?, (continued)
- RE: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? Richard A. Steenbergen (Feb 24)
- RE: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? John Fraizer (Feb 24)
- RE: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? John Fraizer (Feb 24)
- Re: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? mdevney (Feb 24)
- Re: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? Stephen Stuart (Feb 24)
- Re: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? Stephen Sprunk (Feb 24)
- RE: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? Deron J. Ringen (Feb 24)
- Re: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? Stephen Griffin (Feb 24)
- Re: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? mdevney (Feb 24)
- Re: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? Josh Richards (Feb 24)
- Re: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? Bennett Todd (Feb 24)
- Re: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? Andrew Brown (Feb 24)