4 Jun
2007
4 Jun
'07
2:01 p.m.
First usable, 01.
Cu,
Jerome
-----Message d'origine-----
De : swinog-bounces(a)lists.swinog.ch
[mailto:swinog-bounces@lists.swinog.ch] De la part de Daniel
Roethlisberger
Envoyé : lundi, 4. juin 2007 13:54
À : swinog(a)swinog.ch
Objet : Re: [swinog] vtx ADSL /30 subnet practice
Jérôme Tissières <jerome.tissieres(a)smart-telecom.ch> 2007-06-04:
Yes, I confirm if you order a /30, /29, /28, etc
to VTX,
the first IP
of the subnet is assigned to the CPE with the
right mask associated.
The "first" being what is normally referred to as the network
address (ending in bits 00) or the first "normal" address
(end bits 01)?
-Dan
--
Daniel Roethlisberger <daniel(a)roe.ch>
_______________________________________________
swinog mailing list
swinog(a)lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
7 Jun
7 Jun
10:48 a.m.
New subject: vtx ADSL /30 subnet practice
First usable, 01.
Some devices allow you to use network/broadcast addresses too and
this is not a problem for the LNS (you will understand because of the
strange routing at the end of the mail)
However, not all do, so using the +1 IP seems the best option.
The typical setups you can have in Switzerland are:
ISP <---- ppp fixed/dynamic ip ----> ADSL with nat <--- LAN private IPs
(no need to explain anything here)
ISP <--- ppp with subnet other than /32 --- ADSL with multinat <---
LAN private IPs
AFAIR, Multinat is the term used by ZyXEL. It means you have multiple
IPs on the WAN side, however you get assigned only one but you still
can do NAT entries for the other IPs of the subnet.
ISP <--- ppp with fixed/dynamic IP ---> ADSL routed <--- LAN with
public range
This is the normal routed case. I think this is what Daniel was
looking for. If VTX does not offer this, I know other ISPs that do it
(hmmm for example.... I do :P)
<spam>We offer all three possibilities.</spam>
Perhaps for a better understanding of the curious, I can show the
differencies in the radius,
The classic fixed IP:
Framed-IP-Address = 1.2.3.4 # WAN IP
Framed-IP-Netmask = 255.255.255.255 # WAN MASK
The classic routed range:
Framed-IP-Address = 1.2.3.4 #WAN IP
Framed-IP-Netmask = 255.255.255.255 # WAN MASK
Framed-Route = 2.3.4.0/24 # LAN PREFIX
And finally the "MultiNAT" way (I find it kinda ugly..)
Framed-IP-Address = 1.2.3.129 # WAN IP
Framed-IP-Netmask = 255.255.255.248 # WAN MASK
Framed-Route = 1.2.3.128/25
The route here seems useless, but it is not. The Cisco takes a PPP
client with a /32 mask, overriding the Framed-IP-Netmask. Therefor
you have to route the other IPs to the customer. The netmask seems
useless if the cisco ignores it, but you still need to send it
because the PPP device (ZyXel, netscreen, whatever) really cares
about it ;-)
lns01.xxx#show ip route vrf xxx xxx.xxx.xxx.65
Routing entry for xxx.xxx.xxx.65/32
Known via "connected", distance 0, metric 0 (connected, via
interface)
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* directly connected, via Virtual-Access328
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
lns01.xxxb#show ip route vrf xxx xxx.xxx.xxx.64
Routing entry for xxx.xxx.xxx.64/29
Known via "static", distance 1, metric 0
Redistributing via ospf xxx
Advertised by ospf xxx subnets route-map xxx
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* xxx.xxx.xxx.65
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
I hope it helped anyone to understand this...
But perhaps they are confused now ;-)
Cheers,
Pascal
8 Jun
8 Jun
1:09 a.m.
New subject: vtx ADSL /30 subnet practice
Pascal Gloor <pascal.gloor(a)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(a)roe.ch>
15 Jun
15 Jun
10:20 p.m.
New subject: vtx ADSL /30 subnet practice
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(a)roe.ch>
To: swinog(a)swinog.ch
Subject: Re: [swinog] vtx ADSL /30 subnet practice
Send reply to: swinog(a)swinog.ch
<mailto:swinog-
request(a)lists.swinog.ch?subject=unsubscribe>
<mailto:swinog-
request(a)lists.swinog.ch?subject=subscribe>
Pascal Gloor <pascal.gloor(a)spale.com>
2007-06-07:
[snip]
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(a)sip.ip-tel.ch
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(a)roe.ch>
_______________________________________________
swinog mailing list
swinog(a)lists.swinog.ch
http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog 
5835
days inactive
5846
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Daniel Roethlisberger -
Jérôme Tissières -
Pascal Gloor -
Roger Schmid