Exodus / Clue problems

Mon Nov 16 23:00:47 UTC 1998

> Define "network border." I used to block all traffic from or to RFC1918
> addresses, but my present upstream is using 10.0.0.0/8 and
> 172.16.0.0/16, at least, for their internal use. So, the IP address of
> the WAN interface on my router connecting to them has a 10.0.0.0/8
> address. If I block incoming traffic to 10.0.0.0/8, they can't monitor
> my net.

They are using (wasting) the whole 10.0.0.0/8 on one LAN?  Sheesh!

I've picked 172.30.0.0/16 to be divided up into 16384 /30's to use for
numbered links.  I'll probably choose another piece of address space
in 172.16.0.0/12 for a LAN for a few special things like "permanent"
DNS server addresses that will "never" change.  My current thinking is
to leave 10.0.0.0/8 workable between customers, let 172.16.0.0/12 be for
special uses, and let customers do with 192.168.0.0/16 whatever they
wish.  There's no real ideal solution.

How far from the intent of RFC1918 has that gone?

-- 
 --    *-----------------------------*      Phil Howard KA9WGN       *    --
  --   | Inturnet, Inc.              | Director of Internet Services |   --
   --  | Business Internet Solutions |       eng at intur.net        |  --
    -- *-----------------------------*      philh at intur.net       * --