nanog mailing list archives
Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
From: Jeroen Massar <jeroen () unfix org>
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 17:07:50 +0100
Trey Darley wrote:
Hi, y'all - 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.
Of course you can use public address space, and actually you should have been doing that already for years. The catch is of course that you just get it from your local RIR or LIR, thus making sure it is globally unique, as that is where the problem of RFC1918 lies for most people. Another trick is of course to start moving to IPv6: get a /48 or more from your local LIR/RIR and you have all the IPs you will ever need (unless you plan wrong and ask for too little ;) Greets, Jeroen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Current thread:
- RE: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space, (continued)
- RE: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Skeeve Stevens (Feb 03)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Ricky Beam (Feb 04)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Måns Nilsson (Feb 04)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Randy Bush (Feb 04)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space James R. Cutler (Feb 04)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Ricky Beam (Feb 04)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Owen DeLong (Feb 03)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Nathan Ward (Feb 02)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Adrian Chadd (Feb 02)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Seth Mattinen (Feb 02)
- RE: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Michael Hallgren (Feb 02)
- Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space Valdis . Kletnieks (Feb 02)