|
Home > Archive > 70-216 > February 2003 > Simple Subnet confused!!??!?!
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Simple Subnet confused!!??!?!
|
|
|
| CIDR
some links about CIDR? | |
|
|
| B4yaman3 2003-02-09, 5:47 am |
| Damn..I have the pdf but was looking for the site.. I just need the URL for keep..
cm2gj keep it going.. | |
| Tech Ranger 2003-02-09, 9:15 am |
| Maybe I am just too stupid to understand this, but with the capability to do proxy servers, NAT, etc. why haven't all networks been built with all private addressing? Shouldn't a handful of public addresses be enough for even a large enterprise? What is with all this subnetting and drain of public addresses? What am I failing to understand? | |
| Slinky 2003-02-09, 11:57 am |
| quote:
Originally posted by Tech Ranger
Maybe I am just too stupid to understand this, but with the capability to do proxy servers, NAT, etc. why haven't all networks been built with all private addressing? Shouldn't a handful of public addresses be enough for even a large enterprise? What is with all this subnetting and drain of public addresses? What am I failing to understand?
That's a good question, and I've wondered the same thing myself. It would surely save companies a lot of money using private IPs.  | |
| mikop 2003-02-09, 12:31 pm |
| portocol handling
security
ipv4 bad
nat bad
voip
multicast apps
nat = stop gat measure, not the solution.
I much rather work with my hands free designing my network... then to deal with NAT.
evan as end users, have you try to play games? ie. host games? you are at the mercy of a variety of factors, equip, game code etc.
and ummp... to be technically actually, what we are thinking is NATPT, or cisco refer to it as PAT -port address translation. 1 to 1 NAT there is no reservation of public addresses, jsut that by using internal addressing, we can make changes much easier at a central place, rather than to have to change the machine.
also, look at other nations... japan, other metro where things are cutting edge. compare to the US... where it is "PDA... on the internet? wow that's so cool!" ppl in many other nations are much better connected than we are... their needs are beyond oooo 1 ip lets just translate it so it can be use by 30,000 ppl! and that leads to the biggest problem of why we need to move beyond NAT.
IPv4 is US, IPv6 is the world. look at ip distribution... it is anything but fair... the conecntration in US companies are not fair... where other nations whose telecom are more net oriented and still getting a crappy block of ip, US companies are hogging... the voluntary give back of address block is like NAT, just hoping we can put off the inevitable a bit longer.
anyway, the issue is not jsut technical... of why companies are still putting public ip on each workstations when they can do private addressing. most companeis you will find their workstations are using private addressing. however, the either have ip mapped, or simply just want to hog them. take into the effect of a company of 100-500 ppl prolly have servers running, that take their consumption of ip to say 50. you multiple that and we are still crappy. anyway, I would rather sit there with ip not assigned just in case some new venture would require I statically map it to some machines than to say, heh, here is another 1000 free ip, take it and use it for the good of the world in the cause of conservation... but when we implment something, I will get my XXX fried because I don't have the ips. | |
| cm2gj 2003-02-09, 12:59 pm |
| quote:
Originally posted by Slinky
This is about the only link that you'll ever need regarding IP addressing.
http://www.3com.com/other/pdfs/infr...n_US/501302.pdf
Highly recommend book marking it. 
thanks for the link.
i´m refreshing subneting issues for the 221 exam..... | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|