Another LTE network turns up as IPv4-only squat space + NAT

bmanning at bmanning at
Thu Jul 19 09:41:59 UTC 2012

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:36:31PM -0400, Chuck Church wrote:
> I disagree.  I see it as an extra layer of security.  If DOD had a network
> with address space 'X', obviously it's not advertised to the outside.  It
> never interacts with public network.  Having it duplicated on the outside
> world adds an extra layer of complexity to a hacker trying to access it.
> It's not a be-all/end-all, but it's a plus.  A hacker who's partially in the
> network may try to access network 'X', but it routes to the outside world,
> tripping IDSs...
> Chuck

	Never is a -very- long time.
	That said, -IF- DoD did authorize another party/contractor to utilize
	some DoD address blocks, its not clear if that LOA would be public.


More information about the NANOG mailing list