nanog mailing list archives
Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space
From: Florian Weimer <fw () deneb enyo de>
Date: Sun, 15 Aug 2010 19:15:11 +0200
* Michael J. Wise:
On Aug 15, 2010, at 9:14 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:What's the current consensus on exempting private network space from source address validation?BCP38-land MUST *never* see RFC1918-space traffic. Ever. Unless you're using a border router as a NAT device, of course.... The only way your question makes sense is if someone who should know better is intending to announce some chunk of RFC1918-space via BGP. Please tell us that is not your intent.
It's not. It's not even about my or my employer's network, that's why I need to exercise extra caution before handing out advice. 8-)
Current thread:
- Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space, (continued)
- Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space Florian Weimer (Aug 15)
- Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space Adam Armstrong (Aug 15)
- Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space Valdis . Kletnieks (Aug 16)
- Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space Joe Greco (Aug 16)
- Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space Valdis . Kletnieks (Aug 16)
- RE: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space Leigh Porter (Aug 23)
- Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space Ali (Aug 23)
- Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space Joel Jaeggli (Aug 23)
- RE: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space Leigh Porter (Aug 23)
- Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space Florian Weimer (Aug 15)
- Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space Marco Hogewoning (Aug 15)
- Re: BCP38 exceptions for RFC1918 space William Herrin (Aug 15)