home bbs files messages ]

Just a sample of the Echomail archive

Cooperative anarchy at its finest, still active today. Darkrealms is the Zone 1 Hub.

   RBERRYPI      Support for the Raspberry Pi device      21,939 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 19,827 of 21,939   
   William Unruh to Bud Frede   
   Re: Where to get the sources (openconnec   
   04 Apr 24 15:43:33   
   
   INTL 3:770/1 3:770/3   
   REPLYADDR unruh@invalid.ca   
   REPLYTO 3:770/3.0 UUCP   
   MSGID:  0c1949d9   
   REPLY: <7ivPN.86565$mMj7.8864@fx01.iad> dd2d2545   
   PID: SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
   XPost: alt.os.linux.ubuntu, alt.os.linux.mageia   
      
   On 2024-04-04, Bud Frede  wrote:   
   > Marco Moock  writes:   
   >   
   >> On 02.04.2024 um 22:16 Uhr William Unruh wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> ?? 192.168.x.x is non-routable.   
   >>   
   >> It is routable, but won't be routed on the internet.   
   >> You can of course route it through a tunnel like here.   
   >   
   > I always say that the RFC 1918 addresses are "not normally publicly   
   > routed." :-)   
   >   
   > As you say, they definitely _are_ routable, or a whole lot of home and   
   > corporate networks would not be functional.   
      
   The key word is "publicly". Ie, once you get away from directly attached   
   networks (or internal routers you have specially set up within your   
   organization) and some outside router needs to be involved to get the   
   packet from here to there, then that router has no idea which of the   
   millions of networks with 192.168.  to send the packet to.   
   In the case in question, there are two networks with the same 192.168.   
   network addresses. As mentioned the locally attached network should get   
   the nod. The claim is that it is not. Of course this is going by tun to   
   remote vpn. So if the local 192.168. addresses are being set up so that   
   those packets still get delivered through tun, then the "localy attached   
   network" could well be the remote one. Answer, tell your local machine   
   to deliver all 192.168 stuff not to tun but to a local router which   
   knows about your local 192.168.   
      
   >   
   > I saw a video not too long ago that pointed out that the use of these   
   > addresses and NAT was made widespread by the Cisco PIX. It was a pretty   
   > interesting look back at something new that now seems commonplace and   
   > ordinary.   
   >   
   >   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)   
   SEEN-BY: 10/0 1 15/0 90/1 103/705 105/81 106/201 128/260 129/305 135/220   
   SEEN-BY: 135/225 153/757 7715 218/0 1 601 700 840 870 930 220/70 221/1   
   SEEN-BY: 221/6 226/17 30 100 227/114 229/110 111 112 113 200 206 307   
   SEEN-BY: 229/317 400 426 428 470 550 616 664 700 240/1120 266/512   
   SEEN-BY: 267/800 282/1038 291/111 292/854 301/1 113 812 310/31 320/219   
   SEEN-BY: 322/757 335/364 341/66 342/200 396/45 460/58 633/280 712/848   
   SEEN-BY: 770/1 3 100 330 340 772/210 220 230 5020/400 1042 5058/104   
   SEEN-BY: 5075/35   
   PATH: 770/3 1 218/840 221/6 301/1 218/700 229/426   
      

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca