Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 08:54:33 -0500 (EST) From: Bill Vermillion <bill@bilver.magicnet.net> To: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: two routers back to back: Do they need real ip-adresses? Message-ID: <199811131354.IAA28224@bilver.magicnet.net> In-Reply-To: <199811130430.UAA22947@kjsl.com> from Javier Henderson at "Nov 12, 98 08:30:40 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Javier Henderson recently said: > Bill Vermillion writes: > > As long as both routers know about the other and it is an > > ethernet connection - just hook them together. I did that in > > the process of moving 4 C's from one provider to another. It > > made it convenient and then I could upgrade the IOS on the > > first. ... > > > Our uplink isp wants us to subnet one of our C's in a /30, is > > > this really nessecary? > > That's typically the address of the serial port. A /30 gives a > > four address range. The network number, 2 IPS, and a broadcast > > number. The ones I've seen have the ISP as the lower of the two > > addresses and the client as the upper of the two. These normally > > are not part of your address space. > The above is correct, though your ISP probably wants you to > use numbered links so packets generated by either router have an IP > source address of the interface from which they are leaving the > router. This can help troubleshoot certain network problems. The two different providers I used - had to move because our first couldn't supply needed bandwidth for a contract we got - all use the /30 method. It always seemed logical to me - as that was the first way I had ever seen it or used it. I've taken the top end of one of our C's, and broken it up into groups of 4 so I can route addresses out through the serial ports for remote services. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199811131354.IAA28224>