At 11:01 AM 3/25/96 GMT, Julio Sanchez wrote:
>
>Sorry, you are missing the point. The addresses are in conflict.
>If you have taken network 193.127.51.0/24 for your network, how, please
>tell, will your hosts ever going to talk to my WWW server? How can
>NAT help when your packets will never leave your network? They will
>never be seen by the NAT device. We are not talking RFC 1597/1918 here.
>
Although I've forgotten what the original thread encompassed, I think
you are misrepresenting my point.
You can really use any arbitrary network address internally, whether
RFc-1918 or not, and with the use of a NAT device at the perimeter,
there are no conflicting addresses. This does not, however, preclude
the need for a valid, and unique, network address which is announced
to the remainder of the Internet community.
- paul
--
Paul Ferguson || ||
Consulting Engineering || ||
Reston, Virginia USA |||| ||||
tel: +1.703.716.9538 ..:||||||:..:||||||:..
e-mail: pferguso @
cisco .
com c i s c o S y s t e m s
|
|
