nanog mailing list archives
RE: RFC 1918 network range choices
From: Jay Ashworth <jra () baylink com>
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2017 13:39:04 -0400
I have seen a number of versions of that in reading things people sent me and things I found myself, and all of them seem to depend on ASICs that didn't exist at the time the ranges were chosen, and probably also CIDR which also didn't exist. They sound good, but I'm not buying em. :-) On October 5, 2017 1:32:19 PM EDT, Jerry Cloe <jerry () jtcloe net> wrote:
Several years ago I remember seeing a mathematical justification for it, and I remember thinking at the time it made a lot of sense, but now I can't find it. I think the goal was to make it easier for routers to dump private ranges based on simple binary math, but not sure that concept ever got widely used. Time to start writing out all the binary. -----Original message----- From:Jay R. Ashworth <jra () baylink com> Sent:Thu 10-05-2017 09:41 am Subject:RFC 1918 network range choices To:North American Network Operators‘ Group <nanog () nanog org>; 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
-- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Current thread:
- RFC 1918 network range choices Jay R. Ashworth (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Akshay Kumar via NANOG (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Jay R. Ashworth (Oct 05)
- Message not available
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices John Kristoff (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Randy Bush (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Joe Klein (Oct 06)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Ryan Harden (Oct 06)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Daniel Karrenberg (Oct 06)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices John Kristoff (Oct 05)
- RE: RFC 1918 network range choices Jay Ashworth (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices valdis . kletnieks (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Brian Kantor (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Joe Provo (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Steve Feldman (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Lyndon Nerenberg (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Michael Thomas (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Alain Hebert (Oct 06)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices Owen DeLong (Oct 06)