Re: RFC 1918

["Eric A. Hall" <ehall () ehsco com>]

"Richard A. Steenbergen" wrote:

> Obviously its not prefered by anyone to have RFC1918 sourced packets
> out there, mainly because they're not all that useful. But IMHO your
> belief that these are "Illegal bad wrong packets which should never
> appear on that interface" is incorrect.

They are illegal for two reasons:

  o 1918 says they should never appear and should be filtered
    (it's in the spec).

  o Security is a continuum; filtering traffic that should never
    appear is one less problem, not the end to all problems.

Pardon me for keeping a clean shop that doesn't cause you problems.

> I really don't see why you're wasting your time on it. Actually I
> really don't see why we're waiting our time argueing, this thread
> has long outlived its usefulness. But IMHO the RFC1918-nazi is not
> needed. :P

The problem is that you cause other people problems when you crank them
out. It's most certainly an operational issue. Being carefree and loose
with your network addressing affects other people on the Internet,
especially those who follow the rules as prescribed by the specs.

over and out

-- 
Eric A. Hall                                      http://www.ehsco.com/
Internet Core Protocols        http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/coreprot/