[79441] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The power of default configurations
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Petri Helenius)
Thu Apr 7 13:56:07 2005
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 20:56:01 +0300
From: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi>
To: Paul Vixie <paul@vix.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20050407174135.107D013E3F@sa.vix.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Paul Vixie wrote:
>>no to 1) prolong the pain, 2) beat a horsey.. BUT, why are 1918 ips
>>'special' to any application? why are non-1918 ips 'special' in a
>>different way?
>>
>>
>
>i know this is hard to believe, but i was asked to review 1918 before it
>went to press, since i'd been vociferous in my comments about 1597. in
>
>
IMO, RFC1918 went off the track when both ISP's and registries started
asking their customers if they have "seriously considered using 1918
space instead of applying for addresses". This caused many kinds of
renumbering nightmares, overlapping addresses, near death of ipv6, etc.
Pete
