North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: rfc1918 ignorant (fwd)
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Haesu wrote: > Well, if uBR showing RFC1918 address out on the traceroute is an issue, why not > just reverse the way its configured? > > Put RFC1918 as secondary, and put the routable addr as primary. Either way, it > should work w/o issues, right? Hmm this could affect routing protocols which use the primary address.. > I know quite a few people who purposely put a non-routable IP (whether it be > 1918 or RIR-registered block) as primary on their interface, and use routable > IP as secondary. Their reason for doing this is to somewhat "hide" their > router's real interface IP from showing up in traceroute.. Well, it wouldn't > completely 'hide' it, but to a certain level of degree, it probably does... Right but this one benefit doesnt make right the wrongs! I guess one thing you could do (if you really wanted to implement hacks) is to use the rfc1918 space on your routers and then nat them to a global ip at your borders.. achieves all your goals anyhow (not that i'd recommend it ;)
|