Re: Enough already - or - "The Further Adventures of Net 3"


Vernon Schryver (sgi!vjs%rhyolite.SGI.COM@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU)
26 Oct 88 02:04:50 GMT


In article <In article <3567@phri.UUCP>, In article <3567@phri.UUCP>, roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) writes:
> Perhaps there should be a permanently assigned class-C bogon-net
> number. All the gateways would know to just drop any packet destined to or
> from any host on bogon-net. Machines would come out of the box configured
> to be on bogon-net, and/or the setup documentation would suggest that if
> you don't have a real number, just use this one ...
> --
> Roy Smith, System Administrator
> Public Health Research Institute
> {allegra,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers}!phri!roy -or- phri!roy@uunet.uu.net

In the dark ages, SGI shipped machines with default host files naming a
brand new, out of the box machine as 'IRIS' on net 89. As a result,
there are no doubt many network islands running with net #89 (or 49, but
that is a different though similar story). Some time ago, in a fit of
embarrassment and remorse, I registered a class-C network for SGI to
serve exactly this purpose. At that time, I petitioned the Gods for an
official solution. In Their wisdom, though no doubt not because of my
unworthy request, They declared that host 192.0.2.1 on the official
test network should be used.

Since then, it has become fairly elaborate. An IRIS comes named
'192.0.2.1 IRIS' on its disks, tapes, and even in NVRAM. When the
PROM's, bootp (RFC-951) server, and various "system administration"
tools notice the bogus number, they complain or do something else
reasonable sounding.

If I misunderstood the Gods, I hope that someone will enlighten me.

Vernon Schryver
Silicon Graphics
vjs@sgi.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:43:57 GMT