[52093] in North American Network Operators' Group
Time to update RFC1912? (was Re: Top AS Offenders causing RFC-1918
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Donelan)
Sat Sep 14 21:30:13 2002
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2002 21:29:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20020914174601.G14598@oso.greenflash.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sat, 14 Sep 2002, John M. Brown wrote:
> I would call these orgs, speak to their net people and we would
> mitigate by having them become authoratative for RFC1918.in-addr.arpa.
Is it time to update RFC 1912? The original author has noted several
additional errors, including the ommission of 1918 addresses. Although I
guess since 1918 was published after 1912, that isn't surprising.
http://www.visi.com/~barr/rfc1912-errors.html
A published RFC is easier to reference when trying to get people to change
their behavior than a personal web site.
I remember configuring my DNS servers many, many years ago to sink 0, 127,
255 and RFC1918 addresses. But I can't remember what authority I used to
justify it. Most DNS servers sink 127.in-addr.arpa, probably because the
default configuration and just about every DNS book published shows it in
the configuration file. Sinking the other "well-known" bogons seems to
rely on word of mouth.
