At 06:50 PM 3/7/05 -0500, jamal wrote: >BTW, please cc netdev or myself if you are addressing me. This email was >just forwarde by someone else to me - I am not on linux-net. You seem to >have trimmed down the CC list. > >On Mon, 2005-03-07 at 18:02:18, Steve Iribarne wrote: >>-> >>-> What is so wrong with RFC198 addresses?? >>-> > >>Really RFC1918 you mean... > >Indeed 1918 > >>Well if your product is placed behind a nat'd network, MOST if not ALL >> nat'd network addresses on the "inside" use the RFC1918 address space. > >I read this a few times and still didnt get it: >Why is it that people using 1918 addresses are affecting you? RFC 1918 trivializes the IP addressing by boxing all hosts into either a "private" or "public" category, based on their need to access the Internet. The major thing the RFC misses is the fact that internal to one of these "public" or "private" hosts, you may have another, "even more private" network, for example one that connects the cards within the chassis. Such network must be (for obvious reasons) completely hidden from the outside, and thus cannot come from the "outside" address space. This "outside" space is a union of the "public" and "private" IP addresses. Guess what's left? How 'bout 127.0.0.0. -Z - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
