nanog mailing list archives
Re: RFC 1918 network range choices
From: Michael Thomas <mike () mtcc com>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 17:17:59 -0700
On 10/05/2017 05:14 PM, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
On Oct 5, 2017, at 4:52 PM, Steve Feldman <feldman () twincreeks net> wrote: I have a vague recollection of parts of 192.168.0.0/16 being used as default addresses on early Sun systems. If that's actually true, it might explain that choice.192.9.200.X rings a bell; but those might have been the example addresses they used in the SunOS 3.X documentation
That's what i recall too. For some reason i thought it was hp, but that could easily be wrong.
Mike
Current thread:
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices, (continued)
- 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 Jerry Cloe (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 Jay Ashworth (Oct 05)
- Re: RFC 1918 network range choices William Herrin (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)