|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: RFC 1918
>>>>> "Stephen" == Stephen Kowalchuk <[email protected]> writes: Stephen> Why on earth would anyone object to filtering RFC 1918 Stephen> traffic? I think this thread is beginning to get a bit long, but... Imagine that you inherit a network where RFC1918 addresses are used on most or all backbone links. Because it's reasonably difficult to get real addresses from ARIN for a company starting from scratch, this is perfectly plausible (need customers to justify address space -> need network to get customers -> must build network before address space is acquired). But, like most things that are intended to be temporary, these private addresses on backbone links are likely to become semi-permanent. Now everybody who does a traceroute to or from one of your customers sees an RFC1918 address or two. "Don't build it like that in the first place" is not a very usefull answer -- sometimes there is no choice. Migrating the addresses of the whole backbone could take some time, so what to do in the meantime? Do you start filtering in the core of your network? Do you start making the 7507s in your transit path process switch each packet in the 30Mb of traffic that they're forwarding? Sometimes filtering them out is just impractical untill you can buy a Juniper M40 ;) -w -- Will Waites \________ [email protected]\____________________________ Idiosyntactix Ministry of Research and Development\
|