[36514] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Gauthier)
Mon Apr 9 22:45:23 2001
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 22:31:50 -0400
From: Eric Gauthier <eric@roxanne.org>
To: Andy Dills <andy@xecu.net>
Cc: "Eric A. Hall" <ehall@ehsco.com>, nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <20010409223149.A23257@roxanne.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.32.0104092208030.26305-100000@shell.xecu.net>; from andy@xecu.net on Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 10:12:49PM -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> > Also, they don't have any special-case handling that I am aware of. I
> > tried to get a private /24 to use for the topology examples in my books
> > and couldn't get one. ARIN outright refused the request even though I
> > could prove the need for it, and even though I didn't care about global
> > routing or reachability.
>
> Well, to me it sounds like you wanted your own /24, came up with an
> excuse, and they saw right through it. I mean, if you need IP space for
> your book, 192.168/16 and 10/8 are popular choices.
Well - a bit off to the side of this topic, but when has that stopped anyone
on this list... I seem to recall that 192.0.2.0/24 was reserved for just
this type of use. I can't find an RFC that explicitly says "192.0.2.0/24
is reserved for documentation and example code" though the block has been
reserved by ARIN and Bill Manning's got an Internet Draft saying as much
(http://www.isi.edu/~bmanning/dsua.html). Anyone have a reference to
the official word on this?
Eric :)
