Re: RFC 1918 network range choices

[Akshay Kumar via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

https://superuser.com/questions/784978/why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class/785641

On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 10:40 AM, Jay R. Ashworth <jra () baylink com> wrote:

> Does anyone have a pointer to an *authoritative* source on why
>
> 10/8
> 172.16/12 and
> 192.168/16
>
> were the ranges chosen to enshrine in the RFC?  Came up elsewhere, and I
> can't
> find a good citation either.
>
> To list or I'll summarize.
>
> Cheers,
> -- jra
> --
> Jay R. Ashworth                  Baylink
> jra () baylink com
> Designer                     The Things I Think                       RFC
> 2100
> Ashworth & Associates       http://www.bcp38.info          2000 Land
> Rover DII
> St Petersburg FL USA      BCP38: Ask For It By Name!           +1 727 647
> 1274