Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: (ASCEND) Disappearing pool addresses?
> I just rebooted my MAX 2000 to help it recover from a very strange
> syndrome. Users could not start PPP, because the MAX claimed that
> it was unable to assign an IP address for their session. I have a
> pool set up of 23 addresses, one for each B channel on my PRI. When
> users started to complain about not being able to get an address, I
> looked at it and saw, at various times, 23 addresses in use and none
> free, with no sessions connected.
I don't recommend having exactly as many addresses as ports. In fact, I
recommend having twice as many. Aside from the fact that you give
yourself slop this way to protect against the problem you are
experiencing, there are other advantages.
It is generally a good idea to have spare addresses assigned on a LRU
basis. If an address is immediately reassigned to another user upon
disconnection of one user, the new user might receive bogus traffic
from connections not properly closed by the other user. It's not a
big deal, those connections will just break immediately. However,
there is a small security risk in that the new user (if knowledgable and
determined) could recover and use connections left open by the first
user.
-Phil
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.shore.net/~dreaming/ascend-faq>
or <ftp://ftp.shore.net/members/dreaming/ascend-faq.txt>
Follow-Ups:
References: