nanog mailing list archives
Re: renumbering and roaming
From: "Michael S. Fischer" <otterley () iPass COM>
Date: Mon, 18 May 1998 11:38:04 -0700
In message <Pine.GSO.3.93.980518105250.8122N-100000 () staff uk psi com>, Paul Man sfield writes:
On Sun, 17 May 1998, Michael Dillon turned on his computer and typed:On Sun, 17 May 1998, Michael K. Smith: IMHO every dialup customer from every ISP in the world should use 192.168.254.1 for their DNS address and this number should be hard coded as the default in all client software. Then this problem would go away.if all ISPs agreed to use these addresses... say - TWO resolvers, e.g. 192.168.254,1 and 192.168.253.1 - two mail relays, e.g. 192.168.254.5 and 192.168.253.5 - two news servers, e.g. ---254.9 and 253.9 - two ntp time servers - etc etc [the addresses chosen for /30 netmasks, I think that in my Monday morning brain-state I got it right?] And so on for "standard" services, then we could achieve global roaming SO easily. The number of times we've had customers roam elsewhere and then try and use ou r mail relays when for spam reasons relaying is denied...
After several discussions, we came up with this solution that we think
works well to support standard services for roaming users:
Support a .local. root domain in your DNS servers. Examples of DNS
hostnames would be mail.local., ntp.local., news.local., etc. When a
roamer dials up he generally uses the DNS servers assigned by the NAS;
these addresses would be authoritative on a provider-by-provider
basis. If all networks supported this schema all users could simply
have these addresses coded into their client software and would
connect to the proper machines as they differ on various networks.
iPass is currently building an Internet-Draft specifying the details
of this approach. What do you think?
--Michael
Michael S. Fischer <otterley () iPass COM>
|\ Sr. Systems/Network Administrator, iPass Inc. _O_
| require Std::Disclaimer; |
() Voice: +1 650 944 0333 FAX: +1 650 237 7321 |
"There's a thin line between love and a crime and collaboration"
Current thread:
- Re: renumbering and roaming, (continued)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Dean Anderson (May 18)
- spam control (was renumbering etc) through hiding relays Paul Mansfield (May 18)
- RE: renumbering and roaming Peter Galbavy (May 18)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Blake Willis (May 18)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Paul Mansfield (May 18)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Phillip Vandry (May 18)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Daniel Reed (May 18)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Dean Anderson (May 18)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Forrest W. Christian (May 18)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Michael Dillon (May 18)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Michael S. Fischer (May 18)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Karl Denninger (May 18)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Michael S. Fischer (May 18)
- Re: renumbering and roaming Paul Mansfield (May 19)
- Re: ARIN allocating /20 netblocks? Karl Denninger (May 17)
