[157392] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 169.254.0.0/16
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Morrow)
Thu Oct 18 11:25:33 2012
In-Reply-To: <20121018151856.GD3768@puck.nether.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:25:16 -0400
From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
To: "Majdi S. Abbas" <msa@latt.net>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Majdi S. Abbas <msa@latt.net> wrote:
> RFCs are just paper. As for why they use it.. the common private
> use reserved blocks (10/8, 172.16/12, 192.168/16) are all in use
> internally in their customers networks. This is probably the easiest
> way to avoid addressing conflicts.
>
but, but, but!! we have that nifty new '1918' space... 100.64.0.0/10
:)
