Best practices now-a-days is to use public IPs only for publicly
accessible systems and to use an IP out of the private range for
everything internal.

Internet routers _WILL_NOT_ route packets to a system with a private
IP. Thus, it's some extra security. If somebody find a hole into the
network, they can't talk to your internal equipment.

Charles

On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 3:35 PM, John McKee <jmmckee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
When networking was started, there weren't a lot of devices, and the addresses were assigned to 172.16.x.x.  The corporate office wants all the hospitals in the system to convert to a 10.x.x.x addressing method.  Since all the locations use NAT to connect to the private network and then through the corporate office to the outside world, that doesn't make sense to me.  Is there any rationale for changing addressing behind a NAT firewall?

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Follow-Ups:
Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.