Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
Matlock, Kenneth L
MatlockK at exempla.org
Mon Feb 2 19:01:30 UTC 2009
I see 2 problems off the top of my head with using public IP blocks for
1) You're not going to be able to reach servers/services/etc that
actually have allocated those IP blocks. (May or may not affect you, but
that's your issue to deal with in the future).
2) (and more important) It really makes it easy to 'accidentally'
announce that public IP block out in the future, unless you have proper
announce filters in place (And if something as basic as subnetting isn't
done properly, I doubt route filtering is either). This one not only
affects you, but affects the netblock that gets mistakenly announced
RFC1918 space was designed to prevent these issues.
matlockk at exempla.org
From: sthaug at nethelp.no [mailto:sthaug at nethelp.no]
Sent: Monday, February 02, 2009 11:56 AM
To: darcy at druid.net
Cc: nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space
> > Company A uses public IP block A internally. Company B uses public
> OK, so we start out with a bad network design then.
No. We start with blocks A and B which are both properly allocated by
the relevant addressing authorities.
> > block B internally. Company A and B later merge, and connect their
> > networks. No conflict, no renumbering needed (at least not right
> Maybe. What if they both happened to choose 220.127.116.11/8? Is this just
> matter of decreasing the odds of a conflict? It still seems like bad
> network management to me.
My assumption throughout this whole discussion, which clearly has not
been understood, is that the public IP block used internally is a
properly allocated by the relevant addressing authority. That is, for
me, the whole point of using public addresses to guarantee uniqueness.
Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug at nethelp.no
More information about the NANOG