North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: 10.0.0
> I've noted several providers, including a couple of better-known ones, > using RFC1597 addresses internally. While not a Really Optimal Solution, it > does work, and if you find yourself with only a couple of class C's to work > with.. I'd probably rather preserve them for my customers, and go with > whatever I had to internally, as long as packets still got from A to B. > > The only services that should be affected by the use of such "bogus" > addresses will be traceroute and any routing information passed by the > device. Unfortunately that's not quite true. There are a variety of services which rely on messages received from intermediate hops that would break if the the sending host happened to filter out RFC1918 addresses and a part of the network were using them. Probably the best example is Path MTU Discovery. --jhawk
|