[40277] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IP address blocks for out-of-band inter-provider links
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Mon Aug 6 03:57:50 2001
Message-Id: <200108060757.f767vDv25413@foo-bar-baz.cc.vt.edu>
To: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 05 Aug 2001 22:44:22 PDT."
<20010806054422.1460.cpmta@c011.snv.cp.net>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_1734063872P";
micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 03:57:12 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--==_Exmh_1734063872P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Sun, 05 Aug 2001 22:44:22 PDT, Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com> said:
> Because this isn't supposed to be connected to the Internet, its not
> necessary to use IANA/ARIN/RIPE/APNIC assigned IP address blocks. Several
> providers use private addresses on their out-of-band management networks.
> I would prefer to use globally unique IP addresses between providers to
> avoid conflicts with the RFC1918 private addresses already in use in
> provider's networks, and if the addresses accidently leak.
But of course, all the people involved have their border routers configured
to do proper egress filtering of 1918 addresses, so they won't leak very far ;)
Having said that, you can probably make the case that you're building a
"virtual" exchange point, and ask for some address space for that?
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Operating Systems Analyst
Virginia Tech
--==_Exmh_1734063872P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.8
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/09/2001
iQA/AwUBO25N2HAt5Vm009ewEQLy2QCfUzHW7M92bBuMqgkvFSF6dfcsx+sAoODO
NHz105yV3XzvFpPhbnuNn9AB
=3aeS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1734063872P--
