Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue
From: Leythos (void_at_nowhere.org)
Date: 10/13/04
- Next message: xmp: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Previous message: Me: "Re: My bank uses Windows? Is "Check 21" safe?"
- In reply to: Moe Trin: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Next in thread: Moe Trin: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Reply:(deleted message) Moe Trin: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:54:22 GMT
In article <slrncmohdk.6li.ibuprofin@atlantis.phx.az.us>,
ibuprofin@painkiller.example.tld says...
> In article <MPG.1bd5abc3dbfdf6d3989843@news-server.columbus.rr.com>,
> Leythos wrote:
>
> >And I would bet that 90% of the clueless home users would never have a
> >problem with it - never be impacted by NAT.
>
> I certainly see enough lusers complaining that IRC doesn't work because
> they block or drop port 113. I'm ignoring the applications used to
> share copyright protected material because it's often illegal, but that's
> still going to create a lot of whining.
As I said before, and many times with this idea, if you need a public IP
all you have to do is request it, the default will be NAT.
> >That's just one reason. I can't imagine anyone wanting to run their
> >businesses on public IP's.
>
> So, the first sixty or so lines in
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space are showing a bunch
> of wasted IP space, eh? And we're not even talking about the rest of
> the Fortune 500 that's scattered in what used to be called "Class B"
> space.
>
> Maybe you can't imagine anyone doing so, but there seem to be a few
> organizations that are doing so. Do they _NEED_ all those public IP
I found several state agencies that were running all of their computers
on public IP's, in fact, they had a firewall, but it was setup to pass
ALL traffic in/out without restrictions - funny way of doing it. We
converted them to 32 Public IP natted through the firewall, and then 4
class C segments using private addresses. Took about a week due to some
desktop machines having Fixed IP's.
> addresses? Probably not. How do you propose that they fund the effort
> to change all of the un-needed public IPs to RFC1918. Or have you never
> thought about changing the IP addresses of a few thousand computers without
> disrupting normal operation? Routing tables? DNS? Firewall rules?
As a matter of fact, I have done this, and it's not easy. We do it over
a weekend and after staging things during the month before it.
-- -- spamfree999@rrohio.com (Remove 999 to reply to me)
- Next message: xmp: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Previous message: Me: "Re: My bank uses Windows? Is "Check 21" safe?"
- In reply to: Moe Trin: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Next in thread: Moe Trin: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Reply:(deleted message) Moe Trin: "Re: Probes on Port 135 and 445 continue"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|