On 23 Sep 2011, at 7:21 , Benson Schliesser wrote: > The STS may have similar > semantics as RFC1918 space, in that it's non-routable on the Internet etc. > But it is not meant to be used in the same scope. The draft isn't sufficiently clear on this to my liking. I think it should be explicitly stated that no services are to be hosted on addresses in this prefix. There is no support for the choice for a /10. Why not a /11 or a /9? There is no discussion on the consequences of filtering packets to/from these addresses, such as PMTUD black holes. Hosting the reverse DNS for these addresses within the prefix may or may not be useful. Did anyone try to talk to holders of legacy space that is not present in the global routing table, such as the US government, to see if their addresses can be reused for this purpose? _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf