nanog mailing list archives

Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space


From: Joe Greco <jgreco () ns sol net>
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 10:07:11 -0600 (CST)

On Feb 2, 2009, at 10:57 AM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:
On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Trey Darley <trey () kingfisherops com>  
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 recommend against it, because even though the network is not
connected to the Internet now you never know what the future holds.
Even if it's never connected there are always things that seem to pop
up and cause problems.

Also, if you're address allocation policy has been so badly managed
that you've run out of space in 10.0.0.0/8 adding more IPs to the pool
isn't going to help for very long.

It will if you manage it better.

Fortunately, there's a /12 and a /24 still left.

And a /16.  (What's the /24?)  And possibly some other space that is
reserved-for-other-purposes.

A /12 is more space  
than 99.99% of the networks on the Internet need, so why wouldn't that  
suffice instead of using "real" space.

If you absolutely, positively *had* to allocate another /8, it'd probably
be best to look through Class A space for networks that are not likely to
ever appear on the Internet.  ISTR a bunch of them are assigned to the US
military, for example.

... JG
-- 
Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net
"We call it the 'one bite at the apple' rule. Give me one chance [and] then I
won't contact you again." - Direct Marketing Ass'n position on e-mail spam(CNN)
With 24 million small businesses in the US alone, that's way too many apples.


Current thread: