v6 & DSL / Cable modems [was: Private use of non-RFC1918 IP space

Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu
Tue Feb 10 04:21:46 CST 2009


On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:03:40 +1100, Matthew Palmer said:
> Considering that RFC1918 says nothing about IPv at all, could that be a
> blocker for deployment in general?  That'd also make for an interesting
> discussion re: other legacy protocols (IPX, anyone?)...

I was all set to call shenanigans on this one - except I double-checked the
dates on the RFCs, and RFC1752 pre-dates 1918 by a year...

Not sure what it says about our industry that both RFCs are 13+ years old
now, and we still can't collectively do either one right...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20090210/27a44430/attachment.bin>


More information about the NANOG mailing list