a) Another backbone provider needs access to the "private" branches d) BGP would like to know
Interfaces between different providers have public IPs
b) How does the backbone "ask" a node for its' SNMP stats?
I don't see why you would want to expose your snmp service to the internet. Shouldn't you secure it so only certain machines inside your own network can access it?
c) What happens when you sell of part of your stock?
Ummmm... the company that buys it will have to employ you to maintain the network;)
Its better for security if your routers are on private ips. if the router only allows telnet access then you are better off sshing into a neighbouring server first anyway.
Am I the only one in the world that has realised the way networks are currently allocated IPv4 address is extremely wasteful?
Ask yourself, what are the IP addresses for? Sending/Receiving packets to/from Clients and Servers, the leaf nodes of the network.
So why do routers need public IP addresses? Do they need to request web pages, send emails, etc? They just need to forward the packet onto the next router til it gets to its destination.
Why can't networks be designed so all intermediate routers use 10.* ? The only routers that would need public IP addresses would be on the borders of each internet providers so things could be routed through to the destination properly. Each border router could also then drop packets from the 10.* private range as their internal routers should never be sending packets out to the world.
I've noticed some internet providers in australia starting to use this idea, but nowhere near to the extent possible.
Slashdot Mirror
a) Another backbone provider needs access to the "private" branches
;)
d) BGP would like to know
Interfaces between different providers have public IPs
b) How does the backbone "ask" a node for its' SNMP stats?
I don't see why you would want to expose your snmp service to the internet. Shouldn't you secure it so only certain machines inside your own network can access it?
c) What happens when you sell of part of your stock?
Ummmm... the company that buys it will have to employ you to maintain the network
Its better for security if your routers are on private ips. if the router only allows telnet access then you are better off sshing into a neighbouring server first anyway.
no, it wouldn't. I said clients and servers get public IPs. Your PC would have a public ip.
I'm saying most internet providers are a tree, with clients and servers at the leaves, and a link to the rest of the internet at the root of the tree.
I'm saying only the leaves and the roots of the tree need public ips and the branches can use private.
Am I the only one in the world that has realised the way networks are currently allocated IPv4 address is extremely wasteful? Ask yourself, what are the IP addresses for? Sending/Receiving packets to/from Clients and Servers, the leaf nodes of the network. So why do routers need public IP addresses? Do they need to request web pages, send emails, etc? They just need to forward the packet onto the next router til it gets to its destination. Why can't networks be designed so all intermediate routers use 10.* ? The only routers that would need public IP addresses would be on the borders of each internet providers so things could be routed through to the destination properly. Each border router could also then drop packets from the 10.* private range as their internal routers should never be sending packets out to the world. I've noticed some internet providers in australia starting to use this idea, but nowhere near to the extent possible.