North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: do bogon filters still help?
* william elan net: >> You should move 192.88.99.0/24 from SPECIAL to YES (although you >> shouldn't see source addresses from that prefix, no matter what the >> folks at bit.nl think). 169.254.0.0/16 should be NO (otherwise it >> wouldn't be link-local). > > I think you just explained it yourself why this is "SPECIAL", i.e. > routing of it depends on local policies and setup. Anything where it > is not clear from RFCs if it should be routable or not and where it > depends on local decisions & policy is what I called SPECIAL. Uhm, no. 6to4 anycast only works without hickups when the prefix is NOT treated in any special way. 8-) That's part of its charm. If operators start to install special filters, they break this functionality for no real gain. >> I haven't looked at RFC 3330, but another RFC reserves 192.0.2.0/24 >> for examples in documentation. In practice, this prefix is used for >> distributing fake null routes over BGP, so it's a rather strong NO. > > If you know which RFC it is, I'll update the reference table. Uhm, looks like I was mistaken. Each time the topic comes up, I confuse this with RFC 2606 (domain names). No such RFC exists for IPv4 addresses.
|