nanog mailing list archives
Re: 10.0.0
From: "Dave O'Shea" <doshea () mail wiltel net>
Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 11:19:02 -0500
The only services that should be affected by the use of such "bogus" addresses will be traceroute and any routing information passed by the device.Unfortunately that's not quite true. There are a variety of services which rely on messages received from intermediate hops that would break if the the sending host happened to filter out RFC1918 addresses and a part of the network were using them. Probably the best example is Path MTU Discovery.
I meant "services used by normal humans in the course of downloading nude .gif's", i.e., typical Internet customers. I stand by my statement. :-)
Current thread:
- Re: 10.0.0, (continued)
- Re: 10.0.0 Ehud Gavron (May 30)
- Re: 10.0.0 Jared Mauch (May 30)
- Re: 10.0.0 Paul Ferguson (May 31)
- Re: 10.0.0 Bil Herd (May 31)
- Re: 10.0.0 Dave O'Shea (May 30)
- Re: 10.0.0 Philip J. Nesser II (May 30)
- Re: 10.0.0 Alec H. Peterson (May 31)
- Re: 10.0.0 John Hawkinson (May 31)
- Re: 10.0.0 Philip J. Nesser II (May 30)
- Re: 10.0.0 Danny McPherson (May 31)
- Re: 10.0.0 Daniel Senie (May 31)
- Re: 10.0.0 Dave O'Shea (May 31)
- Re: 10.0.0 Tony Li (May 31)
- Re: 10.0.0 Ehud Gavron (May 30)