---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 21:54:10 -0500 From: Wants to keep their Job <xxxx@bellsouth.net> To: John Fraizer <nanog@EnterZone.Net> Subject: RE: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? Typical, indeed. *sigh* BellSouth. Telco Heads, running Telco Products. Let's squeeze this Internet thing into a two-pound telco bag and hope it doesn't squirt out of the sides... L'idiote de telco... :) I'd take up a collection to buy this guy a clue, but if anyone found out it was a Bell Head, no one would give! At 07:01 PM 12/29/00, you wrote:

On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Deron J. Ringen wrote:

...

...

-----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Simon Lyall Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 3:03 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: RFC1918 addresses to permit in for VPN? . . One of the companies we work with has 192.168 address for some of the radius servers we have to talk to, we are directly connected to them so it's not a big pain but it's just so ugly. . . That makes perfect sense to me...there is not a better way to protect a box from a DOS/hack than to only give it a private address. Why expose a box to the outside world if there is not a need???

Deron,

Ever heard of an access list? Didn't think so.

...

Deron J. Ringen Sr. Network Architect BellSouth Internet Services

Typical.

--- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc