On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 at 09:05, Roy Arends <r...@dnss.ec> wrote: > > > > > > I read that to mean they are reserved for private use, and as mentioned > above, any centralized/standardized use is going to conflict with that. > > No. > > No one is suggesting centralised use! The opposite. You can use it locally > because there is no centralised use. >
Standardized use isn't the same as globally reachable. If you say "this thing can be used for purpose X in any network" what happens when it's already in use for purpose Y in someone's network, and they need X to work? > > Using your analogy, there should not be an RFC1918 because it > “standardizes” that 10/0 (etc) can be used for private internets. > > > I'm surprised this thread has such legs. I would have thought this > would wind up when home. and home.arpa were mentioned way up thread. > > I’m surprised that this thread contains so much mis-information. > It would probably help if the thread had started with the intended use.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
