Why use IPv4 for OOB? Seems a little late in the day for that. -Bill
On Nov 10, 2014, at 15:02, "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Paul S. <contact@winterei.se> wrote: I'd be doubtful if anyone will feel like offering a /23 with OOB as justification these days, sadly.
why thought? Justification is really about having a use for the ips, right? and if you have 500 servers/network-devices ... then you have justification for a /23 ... it seems to me.
Good luck nonetheless.
On 11/10/2014 午後 11:00, Ruairi Carroll wrote:
Hey,
VPN setup is not really a viable option (for us) in this scenario. Honestly, I'd prefer to just call it done already and have a VPN but due to certain restraints, we have to go down this route.
/Ruairi
On 10 November 2014 14:38, Alistair Mackenzie <magicsata@gmail.com> wrote:
Couldn't you put a router or VPN system on the single IP they are giving you and use RFC1918 addressing space?
OOB doesn't normally justify a /24 let alone a /23.
On 10 November 2014 13:18, Ruairi Carroll <ruairi.carroll@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear List,
I've got an upcoming deployment in Equinix (DC10) and I'm struggling to find a provider who can give me a 100Mbit port (With a commit of about 5-10Mbit) with a /23 or /24 of public space , for OOB purposes. We had hoped to use Equinixs services, however they're limiting us to a single public IP.
I'm also open to other solutions - xDSL or similar, but emphasis is on cheap and on-net.
Cheers /Ruairi