North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: RFC for Mask/Gateway

  • From: Scott Altman
  • Date: Fri Aug 05 16:13:43 2005
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=h3uDSWR/EkQy/MQYbyrvhFLilNRtrn5YSY1pSVOKQn1tL+k0fnQOFoR+Uy5Ym/vCmdLyR/v+2a3qKeSYDqzUXcFSODMDMhoyxS292KDelC497KMwob4g4mKlxnDc9HZvaWXb/Camp0HAo+tDN6XaIF3KJHMjeGmknCAccDf7pv8=
Thanks to all who replied, actually 791 doesn't specify that a host
needs to implement these things; it lays out IP and how to use a
network mask / gateway.

RFC1122 (thanks to you off-listers) section 3.3.1.6 specifically
(using the RFC's famed "MUST" verbiage) states that a host use a
configurable subnet mask and default gateway.

Oh believe me, if I had a choice, we would have not put this stuff in.
 It's here already and we're just trying to work around it.  More
specifically tell the vendor to get their act together and be a good
network citizen.

Thanks all!

- Scott