Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.mathworks.com!nntp.primenet.com!ddsw1!news.mcs.net!not-for-mail From: les@MCS.COM (Leslie Mikesell) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: IP Masqerading? Date: 22 Aug 1996 23:05:13 -0500 Organization: /usr/lib/news/organi[sz]ation Lines: 67 Message-ID: <4vjalp$sp8@Mercury.mcs.com> References: <jfortes-1307951117380001@10.0.2.15> <321A058E.7209A8FD@lambert.org> <4vglv5$nq4@Mercury.mcs.com> <321BE66F.176B6725@lambert.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: mercury.mcs.com In article <321BE66F.176B6725@lambert.org>, Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> wrote: >] >] Call up your phone company and see if they'll give you >] a block of 500 numbers for a one-time charge. > >They will; it's called "selling you a PBX for a trunk line". > >8-). >Now the question is what they charge for dialtone. Maybe for a new install - but try to add another big block of numbers later when everyone decides they need a personal fax number. >] I've been turned down twice trying to get enough numbers to >] connect up about 600 offices that currently have a satellite >] link using SNA only. > >Turned down by Internic? What was their rationale? They are the >number assigning authority. Hmmm, actually I filled out the forms, and passed them on to the ISPs who never came up with the addresses. Maybe each office should have applied separately. >] What about router memory usage? Is it my imagination or have >] some of the backbone routers become less stable in the last >] few months? > >That was the reason for the reorgs. You must be talking about >SprintNET, or one of the "we will upgrade one router per month" >NSP's. Now that you mention it, most of the times I've used traceroute when having problems they ended up in SprintNET-land. >The reorg is to get all address branches split out on the same >mainline branch to *reduce* the router memeory usage, not to >increase it. But everyone is expanding. How can you take a bunch of contiguous numbers, let everyone double the number they are using and still keep them contiguous? >> SLirP is elegant because it is transparent - you can route any >> addresses through it on the client side without any setup. To >> the rest of the world it looks (correctly) as though you are >> a user on the host machine. However it needs an interface to >> associate with the client side of the route. I'm not sure >> how it would be different from socks if you could map an >> interface instead of a port for the client side of socks (either >> a real separate interface or an alias address on an existing >> interface where you could point the default route of the clients). > >I don't think it would be that much different at all, actually, >except in terms of knowledge of the client being proxied with >the connection. I don't see how either is any worse than dynamic ppp addresses which probably account for half the internet traffic these days. Slirp is just nicer because the client doesn't have to deal with changing its address, and in fact can be routing for any other addresses on the client side. Les Mikesell les@mcs.com