nanog mailing list archives
Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 07:23:17 -0800
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 7:00 AM Owen DeLong via NANOG <nanog () nanog org> wrote:
Since, as you point out, use of the other addresses in 127.0.0.0/8 is not particularly widespread, having a prefix dedicated to that purpose globally vs. allowing each site that cares to choose their own doesn’t seem like the best tradeoff.
I would prefer to discuss the other drafts. However, - and this is not in the 127 draft, and is an opinion not shared with the other authors - I have a specific use case for making 127 "more routable", in that there is nowadays a twisty maze of microservices, bottled up in a variety of kubernetes containers, running on top of vms, on top of a hypervisor, that are often hooked together via rfc1918 addressing and NAT. Trying to figure out that particular path, from within one of those containers, can be a PITA. The concept of 127 being local to a physical host (and routed internally, rather than natted), where those twisty maze of services ideally remains within that host, holds some appeal to me.
Owen
-- I tried to build a better future, a few times: https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC
Current thread:
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public, (continued)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Joe Maimon (Nov 19)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Joe Maimon (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Joe Maimon (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 21)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Joe Maimon (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Max Harmony via NANOG (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Joe Maimon (Nov 20)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 21)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Dave Taht (Nov 19)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 19)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 19)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Jay R. Ashworth (Nov 19)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Sean Donelan (Nov 18)
- Re: Redploying most of 127/8 as unicast public Owen DeLong via NANOG (Nov 19)