|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 14:40:57 +0000 (UTC) From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra@baylink.com> To: North American Network Operators' Group <nanog@nanog.org> Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org Does anyone have a pointer to an *authoritative* source on why 10/8 172.16/12 and 192.168/16 were the ranges chosen to enshrine in the RFC? Came up elsewhere, and I can't find a good citation either. To list or I'll summarize. Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink.com Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover DII St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1274
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |