nearly same story as sdsl before, VTX used 2 IP out of the customer /29 range for the wan link. Traceroute looked funny, not to mention how that "improved" icmp Trouble
Cheers ...
Am 8 Jun 2007 um 1:09 hat Daniel Roethlisberger geschrieben:
Date sent: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 01:09:56 +0200 From: Daniel Roethlisberger daniel@roe.ch To: swinog@swinog.ch Subject: Re: [swinog] vtx ADSL /30 subnet practice Send reply to: swinog@swinog.ch mailto:swinog- request@lists.swinog.ch?subject=unsubscribe mailto:swinog- request@lists.swinog.ch?subject=subscribe
Pascal Gloor pascal.gloor@spale.com 2007-06-07: [snip]
This is the normal routed case. I think this is what Daniel was looking for.
Not quite, but oh never mind. The point I was trying to make is the fact that vtx engineers explained to a customer that he would not be able to assign *any* address of his /30 subnet to a server behind his ADSL router because all of the subnet would be consumed by the link from the LNS to the ADSL router (I guess this hasn't come across too well from my message).
It seems nobody can imagine how this is supposed to be the case, so I guess that confirms that it's probably bogus information. Thanks anyway for all responses!
Cheers Dan
-- Daniel Roethlisberger daniel@roe.ch _______________________________________________ swinog mailing list swinog@lists.swinog.ch http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
csdatabrasil Ltda. Roger Schmid Rua Arquiteto Luiz Nunes 186 Imbiribeira CEP: 51170-430 Recife/ PE BR +55 81 3422 1714 US: +1 360 515 33 80 CH: +41 32 5110858 UK: +44 8444845331 VOIP: 3011@sip.ip-tel.ch
