11 Jun
2012
11 Jun
'12
7:32 p.m.
Of course that would be the case.
One of the reasons we can do this with 44-net is because of the unique
nature of how its separate parts communicate with each other under the
existing system.
--
73, de Barry, K2MF >>
k2mf.bgs(a)gmail.com
On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 8:13 AM, Heikki Hannikainen <hessu(a)hes.iki.fi>wrote;wrote:
(Please trim inclusions from previous messages)
_______________________________________________
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012, Barry wrote:
I have been using my 44-net addresses as "private" IP addresses on my
local LAN for years. There is absolutely no
reason why you can't do
this and it simplifies an awful lot of things. IP addresses are just
numbers. Private IP addresses can be anything you want them to be.
Going a bit OT, but there are some small caveats:
A number of folks apparently decided to use IP addresses starting with 1.
as their private addresses. Like, 1.2.3.4 and 1.1.1.1 instead of 10.2.3.4
and 10.1.1.1. And use them for example configurations and tests of all
sorts.
Recently the 1.0.0.0/8 network was allocated to APNIC, and if you've
configured 1.0.0.0/8 as your local network, you won't be able to talk to
the guys in Asia-Pacific who have now an official allocation for those
addresses. It might have been wiser to use 10.0.0.0/8 instead.
So, let's rephrase a bit:
Private IP addresses can be anything you want them to be, as long as you
are not running NAT and trying to talk to someone else who is running the
same addresses as their public ones.
- Hessu
_________________________________________
44Net mailing list
44Net(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu
http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net