On 05/29/2014 11:21 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
Robert Moskowitz wrote:
On 05/29/2014 10:39 AM, Johnny Hughes wrote:
On 05/29/2014 08:34 AM, m.roth@5-cent.us wrote:
<snip> I was under the impression that the OP actually doesn't want it visible to the world, isn't intending to browse or email via it, but that it was for *only* inside. IF that is the case, he'd have to go into the
router and
tell it to assign it an internal IP, and to *not* NAT it.
WIthout some type of NATing (if you have an internal IP) it can not touch the Internet .. makes reading email kind of hard :D (I did not say direct NATing .. some type of NAT is how things have an internal address and talk to things that have a real address somewhere else)
As driver and co-author of RFC1918, our intention was addresses for
<snip> Yeah, well, my favorite RFC is 1149.... <g>
Then check out 2549. Dave also published an interoperablity test result of 1149! It was a riot!
But my favorite is 1925. Particularly rule 6.