Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!cbosgd!osu-cis!tut!elwell
From: elwell@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Clayton Elwell)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk
Subject: Re: the FastPath dilemma
Message-ID: <3881@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Date: 5 Jan 88 19:47:52 GMT
References: <8801042306.AA24931@cs.utah.edu>
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept of Computer and Information Science
Lines: 26

crum@CS.UTAH.EDU (Gary L. Crum) writes:
    their VAX/VMS systems.  Utah has a class B Internet and wants to use 8 bits
    as a subnet number, but if each new LocalTalk network is assigned a full
    subnet (as we understand the Kinetics code requires), we will be wasting
    many IP addresses.  If you have thought about and solved problems
    like these, please share your experiences.
    
    Gary

Well, the Kinetics gateway code can handle smaller subnets perfectly
well.  I've personally set up gateways with two-bit wide subnets, and
so on.  If you send me a concrete example of what you want, I'll try
to show you waht to do.  I will admit that figuring out the options is
a little arcane if you're not used to it, though.

The only major problem I have with the combined gateway is that it
evidently does not respond to ARPs for hosts on its subnet (sort of
like promiscuous ARP), as does the KIP gateway.  Since all of our
routers depend on promiscuous ARP or RIP, this makes it tough to
telnet around to things on our local (highly subnetted) network.
Sigh.

-- 
Clayton M. Elwell

    UUCP: ...!cbosgd!cis.ohio-state.edu!elwell
    ARPA: elwell@ohio-state.arpa (if you feel lucky...)