RE: Site-site VPN, SBS2003
- From: "JAStillwell" <JAStillwell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 17:39:52 -0700
I stand corrected. What got me screwed up is i did a TRACERT on 10.10.10.100
and it traces across the 'Net! :/
Jeff
"Leythos" wrote:
> In article <F3179587-89A1-4099-B627-700A50209D75@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> JAStillwell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx says...
> > I could be way off-base here, but I thought the only non-routable subnet
> > starting with 10 is 10.0.0.x. I think 10.10.10.x and 10.10.20.x subnets are
> > actually publicly accessible. That may not be the problem, but for multiple
> > IP subnets I suggest using 192.168.x.x.
>
> Setting up a private network for your Windows NT workstations? Don't
> have time, or can't get a registered address range for your network.
> According to RFC1597, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) has
> reserved the following three blocks of the IP address space your use for
> private networks:
>
> * 10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255
> * 172.16.0.0 - 172.31.255.255
> * 192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255
>
> Read RFC1597 for background information including pros/cons of use of
> private ip addresses.
>
> --
>
> spam999free@xxxxxxxxxx
> remove 999 in order to email me
>
.
- References:
- Site-site VPN, SBS2003
- From: Alexis
- RE: Site-site VPN, SBS2003
- From: JAStillwell
- Site-site VPN, SBS2003
- Prev by Date: Re: DESPERATE! - Email SMTP not working.
- Next by Date: RE: ISA 2004 Firewall Client - push to users?
- Previous by thread: RE: Site-site VPN, SBS2003
- Next by thread: Re: Site-site VPN, SBS2003
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|