Great Circle Associates Firewalls
(June 1997)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: RE: Class B Address
From: "Stackpole, Bill" <BSTACKPO @ sla . com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 08:35:08 -0700
To: "'Paquette, Trevor'" <TrevorPaquette @ mcc . net>
Cc: "'firewalls @ greatcircle . com'" <firewalls @ greatcircle . com>

To some extent this is true but using an Internet address internally
that is valid externally makes it difficult to communicate between those
two sites.  Just ask all those people who set up their Sun workstations
using Sun's IP address.  Worked great until they got connected to the
Internet and tried to access Sun's web site.


"Simplify - There is no value in complexity, it's too difficult to
manage."
Bill Stackpole, CISSP                             
Seitel Leeds & Associates          Voice: 206.283.4355
2 Nickerson St.  Suite 201        Email: bstackpole @
 sla .
 com
Seattle, Wa 98109

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Paquette, Trevor [SMTP:TrevorPaquette @
 mcc .
 net]
> Sent:	Friday, June 20, 1997 6:31 AM
> To:	'Michael H. Warfield'; timh @
 usa .
 net
> Cc:	firewalls @
 GreatCircle .
 COM
> Subject:	RE: Class B Address
> 
> I disagree. Any corporation's responsibility IS to the shareholder
> first. Without those shareholders. the company would cease to exist.
> The
> InterNIC holds NO authority within any corporation. Period. (Except
> their own). They have no legal right to tell me what IP space I can or
> cannot use WITHIN my own internal network. (The key word here is:
> WITHIN) They CAN tell me what IP space I can and cannot use to talk
> over
> the Internet. These are two separate things. If someone wants to use a
> random class B within their own network, that's fine with me.. Just
> make
> sure that it does not leak out to the Internet, and that you are doing
> NAT on all connections going in/out.
> 
> Now, that being said.. Sticking to RFC 1597 is a excellent good idea
> because it introduces a very good and well accepted standard that the
> Internet community as a whole can understand and implement. 
> 
> NOTE: We follow RFC 1597.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	Michael H. Warfield [SMTP:mhw @
 wittsend .
 com]
> > Sent:	Thursday, June 19, 1997 9:22 PM
> > To:	timh @
 usa .
 net
> > Subject:	Re: Class B Address
> > 
> > Hello...
> > 
> > Timothy D. Hunt enscribed thusly:
> > 
> > > Hi:
> > 
> > > I have a client who, as the result of installing firewalls, is now
> > using a
> > > registered Class B address that they really don't need.
> > 
> > .. deleted ..
> > 
> > > My question is whether there is a market in Class B addresses, and
> > if so
> > > what might one be worth, so I know whether this might a viable
> idea
> > to persue.
> > 
> > > Thanks for any ideas.
> > 
> > 	I think it would be real good idea to approach this real
> > carefully
> > with a wary eye to what the Internic is going to say.  I went
> through
> > some real hassles a couple of years ago just in changing the
> > organization
> > name my Class B was registered to.  If it wasn't for the fact that I
> > had
> > the address in active use (and still do) I think they would have
> loved
> > to
> > reclaim that lovely piece of prime IP turf.  If they get wind that
> > "Oh, this
> > address space is no longer used", they are just as likely to come
> back
> > and say
> > "Oh, you are suppose to turn those back in."  Their view, as they
> > explained
> > it to me, was that you don't own that address, you only have it
> > assigned
> > to you.  If you aren't using it, you are suppose to return it.
> > Fortunately
> > for me, at the time I made my organizational changes, I was using it
> > and
> > have kept it in use.  They STILL tried the "You can't change the
> > organization.
> > You have to return the address space to us and the new orgainization
> > has to
> > justify a new assignment" routine on me.  If I hadn't been able to
> > demonstrate
> > that it was in current use, I would have lost it right then and
> there.
> > 
> > > P.S. What's my interest? Well the client would need additional
> > consulting help
> > >      to make the change.....
> > 
> > > P.P.S. I've already had the "For the Good of the Community"
> > discussion with
> > > the
> > >        client, and the response was that their fiscal duty was to
> > the
> > > shareholders.
> > 
> > 	Their fiscal duty may have little or nothing to do with it.  The
> > Internic will tell then that they don't own it to begin with and if
> > they
> > no longer need it, they are suppose to return it.
> > 
> > > ----
> > > Tim Hunt, Chatham, NJ, USA  e-mail: timh @
 usa .
 net
> > 
> > 	Mike
> > -- 
> >  Michael H. Warfield    |  (770) 985-6132   |  mhw @
 WittsEnd .
 com
> >   (The Mad Wizard)      |  (770) 925-8248   |
> > http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/
> >   NIC whois:  MHW9      |  An optimist believes we live in the best
> of
> > all
> >  PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471    |  possible worlds.  A pessimist is sure of
> > it!


Follow-Ups:
Indexed By Date Previous: RE: Class B Address
From: mikech @ avana . net
Next: Dual firewall solution (??)
From: manuel . ricca @ pararede . pt
Indexed By Thread Previous: RE: Class B Address
From: mikech @ avana . net
Next: RE: Class B Address
From: Ken Kempster <kempster @ monarch . rnb . com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com