[181156] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Is it safe to use 240.0.0.0/4
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tom Paseka via NANOG)
Wed Jun 17 17:55:53 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CALFTrnPoLfsOHRqPU5B3NMvWCD_5b-2YjBsd=NweQyzar+KLwQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2015 14:54:47 -0700
To: Ray Soucy <rps@maine.edu>
From: Tom Paseka via NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: Tom Paseka <tom@cloudflare.com>
Cc: luan.nguyen@dimensiondata.com, NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
You'll find as well, a lot of hosts (eg, I know at least Windows XP)
won't forward to Class E destinations.
-Tom
On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Ray Soucy <rps@maine.edu> wrote:
> There is already more than enough address space allocated for NAT, you
> don't need to start using random prefixes that may or may not be needed for
> other purposes in the future.
>
> For all we know, tomorrow someone could write an RFC requesting an address
> reserved for local anycast DNS and it could be assigned from this block.
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2015 at 5:07 PM, Luan Nguyen <lnguyen@opsource.net> wrote:
>
>> Is that safe to use internally? Anyone using it?
>> Just for NATTING on Cisco gears...
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ray Patrick Soucy
> Network Engineer
> University of Maine System
>
> T: 207-561-3526
> F: 207-561-3531
>
> MaineREN, Maine's Research and Education Network
> www.maineren.net
