[32274] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 10.x.x.x networks
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eliot Lear)
Wed Nov 15 19:22:43 2000
Message-ID: <3A132845.8C59DFF8@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2000 16:20:21 -0800
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Reply-To: lear@cisco.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Michael Long <mlong@sac.verio.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Michael Long wrote:
> I've been having a friendly arguement with some friends at work about
> wheather it's right or wrong to use 10.255.255.0/24 for a network.
> Technically it should work, but during our conversations we keep coming
> back to best practiced IP schemes. I'm wondering what others think about
> this. Is using 10.255.255.0/24 and possibly the reverse 10.0.0.0/24 bad
> practice?
Although this should work, I would recommend that before someone use
either of these addresses (and in particular 10.0.0.0/24) please
consider how many other networks with that address exist. Without
getting into the whole renumbering argument again on nanog (#include
<flame.h>), if you are able to choose a portion of 10/8 space with some
amount of randomness you can reduce the potential for conflicts in those
cases where two private networks need to merge.
--
Eliot Lear
lear@cisco.com
