[MLB-WIRELESS] IP address range for Geelong?

[Simon J Mudd]

adrian at close.wattle.id.au (Adrian Close) writes:

> > > Because what we are building is going to be part of the Internet (big I)
> > > regardless of what people might think.
> >
> > So, when?
> 
> The instant the first node connects to an Internet-connected host, of any
> form.

I'd like to back you up on this Adrian because I think most people
tend to think of these wireless networks as small local things.  And
that's fine.  However there's no problem making the network scalable,
if that should be required at a later stage.

Just think of you guys in Melbourne, if you connect through Internet
"wormholes" to Sydney and Perth and Cairns and Darwin and ... Fine.
You now have a network whose routing becomes a bit more complicated
and suddenly static routing is a pain, or maybe not even feasible.

Suddenly somewhere in your network you need the infraestructure to
know how to get out of your local area to somewhere else.

And what happens when the guys in Sydney decide to someone in New
Zealand who is by chance linked to someone in the UK, ...

Now IGPs aren't good enough. That's "local routing protocols" like RIP
and OSPF, because there are too many networks and they can't cope.

How do they solve this on the Internet?  They separate things out into
Autonomous Systems which co-operate and just say: "I have these
networks" and lins to these AS...

You're not there yet in Melbourne, we're not there yet in Spain, nor
are the guys in Seattle, France or the UK.  However the real Internet
does allow the links to be put in place, even if the relative
bandwidth over these links is quite low.  And for some of us it would
be a nice goal to attain.

Don't close out the options when now "it doesn't matter".  If it means
doing things one way rather than another and it isn't more difficult
to do things the "global way" you'll save yourselves a lot of effort
in the long term.

I have a sister in Manly so when the Australian network is up and
running it would be nice to link up to her portable on the beach from
my portable in a park using a "couple" of non-wireless links on the
way.  That's a vision, and it may not be achievable, but it's a nice
goal to aim for...

> > > Read this and note it well:  Connect a network to the Internet and it
> > > becomes part of the Internet.
> >
> > Not when it's behind a firewall.
> 
> I'd suggest you broaden the scope of your thinking and read it again.
> 
> A firewall is a device for enforcing traffic flow policy.  That's all.
> If you connect one side of the firewall to the Internet, then any network
> connected otherwise to the firewall becomes part of the Internet.

Also it's worth pointing out that with a firewall and NAT you can "get
out", but you can't "get in", which effectively isolates peer-to-peer
links between different wireless networks, if you don't have a "global
address space", global meaning in this case a non-conflicting RFC 1918
wireless network.

Simon
--
Simon J Mudd,   Tel: +34-91-408 4878,  Mobile: +34-605-085 219
Madrid, Spain.  email: sjmudd at pobox.com,  Postfix RPM Packager

--
To unsubscribe, send mail to minordomo at wireless.org.au with a subject of 'unsubscribe melbwireless'  
Archive at: http://www.wireless.org.au/cgi-bin/minorweb.pl?A=LIST&L=melbwireless
IRC at: au.austnet.org #melb-wireless