[14336] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: test Nets being routed?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@ISI.EDU)
Tue Dec 23 17:23:23 1997
From: bmanning@ISI.EDU
To: randy@psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 1997 14:08:00 -0800 (PST)
Cc: bmanning@ISI.EDU, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <m0xkcPX-0007zYC@rip.psg.com> from "Randy Bush" at Dec 23, 97 02:02:00 pm
>
> >>>> access-list 181 deny ip 192.0.0.0 0.0.0.255 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.255
> > access-list 182 permit ip 199.2.98.0 0.0.0.255 255.255.255.0 0.0.0.255
>
> the latter permits something which the former does not deny. i.e. noop.
>
> randy
permits/denys what? (a retorical query)
the point being that there is no practical difference btween
199.2.98.0/24
and 192.0.0.0/24
or 128.0.0.0/24
or 191.255.255.0/24
these prefixes (and delegation points) are valid or potentially valid
in the routing system whereas
192.0.2.0/24
and 172.16.0.0/16
and 192.168.0.0/24
and 10.0.0.0/8
are not.
--bill (off to re-read RFC 1519 and RFC 1918 just to make sure)
