I'll respond by giving you some definitions.
First, a VPN is a Virtual Private Network. I define it as an
encrypted connection between two (or more) trusted gateways so that it
performs as if it were a real, physical, private network. You can use
any IPv4 IP addresses, as you please, on the private portions of you LAN,
but you can also use Non-Routable (RFC 1918) addresses as well.
Second, Non-Routable addresses are probably what you are asking
about. According to RFC 1918, the following addresses are reserved for
private networks, and by convention, are not routed on the Internet at
large (unless the router is misconfigured, or you have some special purpose
on your public portion of your network (i.e. @HOME uses some of these
addresses for their routers! I call them Semi-Legal addresses :-)
10.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0.0
172.16.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0
192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0
Now, I may be mistaked by that last one. I think there are more than
just the one Class C subnet reserved. That's why I always use something from
the first range (10.0.0.0), although I end up using a Class C netmask. It's
just easier for me to remember.
For you to definitively answer your question, consult RFC 1918. Any
search engine should show you multiple copies.
Bo
The masks are irrelevant and it's 172.16.0.0 through 172.32.0.0
--
Happy Holidays,
Don Kelloway
Email - dkelloway(a)commodon(dot)com
Personal website - http://www.commodon.com
AOL IM (http://www.aol.com/aim) - DKelloway
For *your* protection, visit http://www.commodon.com/threat.htm to learn
about Back Orifice and NetBus. Both of which are threats to a user's
security on the 'net.
root wrote in message ...
>Sense of Reason (m...@me.com) wrote:
>>I am using the ip number range 192.168.0.* to setup my VPN's at the
moment.
>>I do not have a problem with changing the third number set to 42 for
>>example, but is the 192.168 range a VPN ip range anyway, thus making my
>>original configuration valid?
>
> 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0.0
> 172.16.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0
> 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0
No.
10.0.0.0/8 (netmask 255.0.0.0)
172.16.0.0/12 (netmask 255.240.0.0)
192.168.0.0/16 (netmask 255.255.0.0)
root wrote:
>
> Second, Non-Routable addresses are probably what you are asking
> about. According to RFC 1918, the following addresses are reserved for
> private networks, and by convention, are not routed on the Internet at
> large (unless the router is misconfigured, or you have some special purpose
> on your public portion of your network (i.e. @HOME uses some of these
> addresses for their routers! I call them Semi-Legal addresses :-)
>
> 10.0.0.0 netmask 255.0.0.0.0
> 172.16.0.0 netmask 255.255.0.0
> 192.168.0.0 netmask 255.255.255.0
>
Just to verify, the above addresses are the correct non-routable addresses.
You can route them internally all you want. If you connect a network using
RFC1918 addresses to the internet, your perimeter router or your firewall
must perform Network Address Translation.
Joe