home bbs files messages ]

Just a sample of the Echomail archive

<< oldest | < older | list | newer > | newest >> ]

 Message 10381 
 jlavigne@hits-buffalo.com to All 
 Re: Help with Network Settings in 6.06,  
 04 Mar 07 22:26:08 
 
Path: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.co
!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-o
line.de!t-online.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Joe LaVigne 
Newsgroups: alt.os.linux.ubuntu
Subject: Re: Help with Network Settings in 6.06, Puleeez !
Date: 5 Mar 2007 03:26:08 GMT
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <551gufF22l93jU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <17emu2ps9tvb8tvufjrsgmp2cjhge9ihn4@4ax.com>
 
 
 <5512hrF22hcpkU2@mid.individual.net>
 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net nHmRwDGqfoSdeRuZcKyQ9gPZXkPs+MxF97vGVdQX4nJN3rgQVw
User-Agent: pan 0.123 (El Nuevo Barretto)
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.os.linux.ubuntu:11545

On Mon, 05 Mar 2007 00:32:28 +0000, Josiah Jenkins wrote:

> Whilst perusing Usenet on 4 Mar 2007 23:20:27 GMT, I read these words
> from Joe LaVigne  :
> 
>>On Sun, 04 Mar 2007 23:12:17 +0000, Josiah Jenkins wrote:
>>
>>> Whilst perusing Usenet on Sun, 04 Mar 2007 22:49:55 GMT, I read these
>>> words from SINNER <99nesorjd@gates_of_hell.invalid> :
>>> 
>>>>* Josiah Jenkins wrote in alt.os.linux.ubuntu:
>>>>
>>>>[...]
>>>>
>>>>> Connection
>>>>> Network Name = usr9106 - (USR9106 Wireless router)
>>>>> Key type = Hexadecimal
>>>>> WEP = 
>>>>> Configuration = Static IP Address
>>>>> IP Address = 192.168.1.xx - T21 Laptop with Ubuntu install
>>>>> Subnet mask = 255.255.255.0
>>>>> Gateway address 192.168.1.aa - USR9106 Wireless router
>>>>
>>>>I cant really help, sorry, but I can tell you it is not necessary to
>>>>mask 192.xxx.xxx.xxx. 
>>> 
>>> Subnet mask is entered automagically !
>>
>>What he meant is you needn't use 192.168.1.xx.
>> It would be perfectly fine to put 192.168.1.17
>>(or whatever) in a post, since from outside of your
>>network, the address isn't reachable.  Private IP's
>>(192.168, 172.17, 10.) are not routable.
> 
> Aaah, I misunderstood. When SINNER used 'mask'
> I assumed he was referring to the Subnet mask !
> 
> What he (and you) are saying is that I don't need to
> bother disguising my IP addresses ?
> 
> -- jjj

Right.  Even if I wanted to, I couldn't connect to your machine through
that private IP.  I would need to know the publi address, and a port that
is NATted through...
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Omicron Theta BBS (1:261/20)

<< oldest | < older | list | newer > | newest >> ]

(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca