Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!iwarp.intel.com!news
From: merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.admin.policy
Subject: Re: IP Number management
Message-ID: <1991May23.060743.15364@iwarp.intel.com>
Date: 23 May 91 06:07:43 GMT
References: <1991May22.130444.1410@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> <1991May22.171817.21820@ariel.unm.edu> <1991May22.201938.6749@news.larc.nasa.gov> <1991May22.224555.2248@ariel.unm.edu>
Sender: news@iwarp.intel.com
Reply-To: merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Organization: Stonehenge; netaccess via Intel, Beaverton, Oregon, USA
Lines: 18
In-Reply-To: pkrause@triton.unm.edu (Paul Krause CIRT)

In article <1991May22.224555.2248@ariel.unm.edu>, pkrause@triton (Paul Krause CIRT) writes:
| Only a little.  We have had multiple cases of people erasing their hard drive
| and copying all the files from someone else with a resulting conflict.  We 
| did have an employee quit, another person start using his machine and him
| then coming back and getting a 2nd number.  It does not require a large
| intuitive leap to envision more "interesting" problems that I don't know
| about yet.

You know, if the boxes supported RARP, and you had a RARP server, you
wouldn't have these problems.  Ether addresses are pretty darn unique
and can't be copied just by copying hard disks.

Just another network admin,
-- 
/=Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 ==========\
| on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Beaverton, Oregon, USA, Sol III      |
| merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!any-MX-mailer-like-uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn |
\=Cute Quote: "Intel: putting the 'backward' in 'backward compatible'..."====/