locked
why the need for lexigraphically following ipv4 addresses? RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hello there,
    we implemented uag with da now for a month and we are quite good with it. now what i ALWAYS wondered about why we need two lexigraphically following ipv4 addresses (so that .8 and .9 are ok, but .9 and .10 are not). Is this simply a programming mistake in the mmc of da? i am asking because i am very well aware you need two public ipv4 adresses to determine if you are behind a nat. but i NEVER EVER (in any RFC or whatever) saw the need for LEXIGRAPHICALLY following ipv4 adresses? So my question would be to you guys: is this simply a bug or does it make sense in any way?
    best regards
    Joerg

    Friday, February 26, 2010 11:37 AM

Answers

  • Hi Joerg,
    In UAG DirectAccess you do not need lexigraphically folloing IPv4 addresses.
    .9 and .10 are perfectly usable.

    Did you ever encounter an issue in UAG where these 2 weren't usable?

    Thanks,
    Yaniv
    • Marked as answer by Erez Benari Monday, March 1, 2010 9:23 PM
    Monday, March 1, 2010 10:34 AM

All replies

  • Hello,

    answering this question ain´t rocket science. Anyone an idea?

    best regards,
    Joerg
    Monday, March 1, 2010 7:19 AM
  • Hi Joerg,
    In UAG DirectAccess you do not need lexigraphically folloing IPv4 addresses.
    .9 and .10 are perfectly usable.

    Did you ever encounter an issue in UAG where these 2 weren't usable?

    Thanks,
    Yaniv
    • Marked as answer by Erez Benari Monday, March 1, 2010 9:23 PM
    Monday, March 1, 2010 10:34 AM
  • Hi Joerg,

    This is part of the Windows DA docs, but doesn't seem to be a problem with UAG

    Thanks!
    Tom
    Monday, March 1, 2010 12:54 PM