On 12/5/11 07:51 , Pete Resnick wrote: > On 12/4/11 9:04 AM, Hadriel Kaplan wrote: >> For RFC 1918 space, the problem with picking it isn't so much that the ISP can't pick one that consumer NATs don't use - it's that they can't pick one that no Enterprise on a *different* ISP uses. For example, assume my employer used 10.64.0.0/10 (they probably do somewhere), and connected to ISP-A. I connect to ISP-B using a 3GPP laptop-card, and get the same 10.64.0.0/10 address space. I now cannot use a VPN to my employer, because of the resulting conflict in the routing table in my laptop. But there's nothing I nor my *ISP-B* can do about this, because my employer has been using that address for a long time (legitimately) and is connected to *ISP-A*. >> > > Doesn't this same problem exist if I'm currently attached to a CPE NAT > that provides me with a 10.64.0.0/10 address and my VPN uses the same > space? Are you saying that VPN software does not already deal with this? Some vpn clients will split the routing table to isolate vpn routes from external routes which copes just fine with this case, much as does VRF on a router. > pr > > -- > Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/> > Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf