|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: RFC1918 conformance
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Thu, 13 Feb 1997 13:47:24 +0300 (MSK), [email protected] writes: > >On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, Dana Hudes wrote: > >> Gated allows you to specify the ospf router id. AS others have mentioned >> so does Bay. Out of curiousity, is anyone running anything other than > >I know it well (really we have few gated-based routers there). Let me to >point my mind - it may be usefull to have short reserved address space in >the beginning (net 1.0.0.0) and the end (223.255.0.0/16 or simular) >address space. CISCO's router-id was used as amazing example _why it mey >be usefull_. I don't think that Internet engineering decisions should be based solely on the basis of Cisco's bad decsisions regarding their OSPF implementation. You claim that there are other reasons why reserving 1.0.0.0/8 and 223.255.0.0/16 are a good idea. Can you share some of these reasons? I'm not totally against reserving these networks, but I do require more convincing. [A copy of the headers and the PGP signature follow.] Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 08:01:01 -0600 From: "Jeffrey C. Ollie" <[email protected]> In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 13 Feb 1997 13:47:24 +0300." <[email protected]> Subject: Re: RFC1918 conformance To: [email protected] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: AnySign 1.4 - A Python tool for PGP signing e-mail and news. iQCVAwUBMwMeopwkOQz8sbZFAQE4gQP+N/jvy38bdxJlsqmiRhbfT9Nga6y5R57G opT5uzRpTa2B17ikDzYUEZgmjtXKcFTj6jCNXmcNoh3Be9g5SDFqZHvaiXUrvVwG Lcorm1iSN/x2HwXfkjKBxP7b2bAvjbCJinpIQp1cWU4BJymemwX+Bjwn7zMTtkl2 4b6oeADxi+A= =nUMC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Jeffrey C. Ollie | Should Work Now (TM) Python Hacker, Mac Lover | - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|