[BC] Help on VPN setup

[George Nicholas]

Cowboy - I used the 192.168.0.5 address because the 318 defaults to a 0
address out of the box.  of course you can specifiy another starting address
and range for DHCP.

You can also specifiy a port (besides 80) for remote management.

(I'm no expert, I'm learning every day!)   :)

gn
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Cowboy" <curt at spam-o-matic.net>
To: "Broadcast Radio Mailing List" <broadcast at radiolists.net>
Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 3:56 PM
Subject: Re: [BC] Help on VPN setup


>
> On Saturday 01 October 2005 14:31, George Nicholas wrote:
>
> > In theory, once the VPN tunnel is working, you should be able to ping
the
> > internal IP address of computers on the other side, ie 192.168.0.5.  If
you
> > can, then you have connectivity (at least you can ping)
>
>  That's pretty straight-forward, and crucial.
>  Can you, in fact, via the VPN tunnel, ping any of the non-routable
>  private block IP's on the other side of the tunnel ?
>  If so, then the public side is not too relevent, and the tunnel should
>  act like a slow, but direct, ethernet connection.
>  If you can not, then can you ping the public, routable side of the router
?
>  Since M$ screwed up with the Ping Of Death, even if you can not, this is
not
>  definitive, but if you can, then you'ld know with certainty that there is
a
>  problem with the tunnel.
>  If you can not, then you need some other protocal to which the public
interface
>  will respond, in order to do the job ping and pong were designed for.
>
>  In the example IP given above, I can't help but mention that using
>  the special case mask numbers zero or 255 as a network, or machine
>  address is a really, really, REALLY bad idea.
>  That alone could completely screw up an otherwise fully functional
network, as
>  M$ once again, chose to ignore convention.
>  How any particular element responds to a mask depends entirely on which
>  school it's from.
>  Pure M$ ignores masks, depending on context, and sometimes every address
is
>  treated discreetly, or not depending on the context, while anything else
takes a mask
>  for what it is, and the response becomes configuration dependent as a
result of
>  applying that mask.
>
>  While the machines may well ( being M$ machines ) respond to the zero, or
a 255, the router
>  may interpret this as a request to route to the one and only one machine
that has every
>  possible individual IP address in that entire block.
>  Clearly, an impossibility, so the router may simply drop the packet as a
non-routable error.
>
>  Once the VPN tunnel is established, this should not matter, as the
packets with the
>  garbage addresses will be encased in wrappers that pass through the VPN,
and depend
>  on the routing on the other side entirely.
>
> -- 
> Cowboy
>
> http://cowboys.homeip.net
>
> omnibiblious, adj.:
>  Indifferent to type of drink.  Ex: "Oh, you can get me anything.
>  I'm omnibiblious."
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists:
http://www.radiolists.net/
>