nanog mailing list archives

Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space


From: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner () cluebyfour org>
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 11:04:57 -0500 (EST)

On Mon, 2 Feb 2009, Trey Darley wrote:

Some colleagues and I are running into a bit of a problem. We've been
using RFC 1918 Class A space but due to the way subnets have been
allocated we are pondering the use of public IP space. As the network in
question is strictly closed I don't anticipate any problems with this as
the addresses would be unambiguous within our environment. I'm curious if
anyone else is doing this.

I'd be very interested in corresponding off-list with anyone who's in a
similar position.

Technically, yes you can use non-RFC1918 space in this way, but is definitely not a good idea. The needs of the people using the network could change at some point in the future, where some degree of Internet connectivity is needed, at which point your support headaches would multiply if you used non-1918 space in this manner.

Is there a reason that other 1918 address ranges (172.16/12, 192.168/16)
could not be used?

jms


Current thread: