Re: SSH'ing between machines with private IPs

"Unruh" == Unruh <unruh-spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Unruh> "Richard E. Silverman" <res@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>>>> "Unruh" == Unruh <unruh-spam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

Unruh> No All public routers throw them away precisely because of
Unruh> their problems. Sure, internally you may be able to route
Unruh> them,

>> Hence they are not "unroutable;" the term is a contradiction,
>> period. It makes no sense.

Unruh> Again, they are unroutable because the routers in between throw
Unruh> the packets away. They do not return them (whatever that would
Unruh> mean), they simply drop them. That is what I mean by
Unruh> unroutable.

That's silly. Not all routers in the world do this; only some. Trucks
are not allowed to drive on some roads. I suppose the trucks are
"undrivable," then?

In English, the construction "un<foo>able" means "cannot be <foo>ed."
That's simply what it means; you can pretend it means something else, I
suppose, but then you're Humpty Dumpty redefining "glory." You have
alread agreed yourself that in some contexts, these addresses may be
routed. These contexts are not rare; they are inside every *privately*
numbered network (gee, there's that word again). Hence, they are *not*
"unroutable." They are, in some contexts, unrouted. That is not the same
thing.

The most you can correctly say in this vein, would be "publically
unroutable." Even that is suspect, since they certainly could be routed
on the public Internet; it would just be a very bad idea.

--
Richard Silverman
res@xxxxxxxx

.