snip blah
Since all of the replies have been pretty close to the same (Use RFC1918
...etc), I'd like to rephrase it to answer a curiosity of mine.
The answers seemed correct, rephrasing wont change current systems or policies
to suit you!
RFC1918 is a set number of IP addresses. If you are
On Fri, 30 May 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm tasked with coming up with an IP plan for an very large lab
network. I want to maximize route table manageability and
router/firewall log readability. I was thinking of building this
lab with the following address space:
: Murphy, Brennan
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 8:49 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: IANA reserved Address Space
Others have pointed out that I should stick to
RFC 1918 address space. But again, this is a
lab network and to use the words of another,
one of the things I want to do is make
On Fri, 30 May 2003 05:49:28 PDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
one of the things I want to do is make it much
easier to parse visually my route tables.
Might want to use networks 4/8, 16/8, and 64/8 - they stand out
nicely when looking at net numbers in hex or binary. ;)
pgp0.pgp
Brennan,
If you want your routes to be human parse'able, I recommend running your lab in full
IPv6 mode. That way you take Valdis's recommendation to a whole new level (and base
number system).
Plus... Whats the point of having a lab that only uses 1982/1983 addressing
techniques (1/8,
: IANA reserved Address Space
networks 1 and 100 are reserved for future delegation.
network 10 is delegated for private networks, such as your
lab.
if you use networks 1 and 100, you are hijacking these
numbers.
that said, as long as your lab is never going to connect
to the Internet
really appreciate everyone's feedback on this.
-Original Message-
From: Murphy, Brennan
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 9:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: IANA reserved Address Space
OK, I see now that down the road using
a 1 and 100 net address on the lab would
create unmanageable
]
Subject: Re: IANA reserved Address Space
networks 1 and 100 are reserved for future delegation.
network 10 is delegated for private networks, such as your
lab.
if you use networks 1 and 100, you are hijacking these
numbers.
that said, as long as your lab is never going to connect
to the Internet
on this.
-Original Message-
From: Murphy, Brennan
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 9:21 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: IANA reserved Address Space
OK, I see now that down the road using
a 1 and 100 net address on the lab would
create unmanageable problems if those nets
were ever put into use
If you're running tests do you want too see results such as
192.168.22.0, 172.16.89.22, 10.129.20.222, 10.12.22.2? Wouldnt it be
easier if your test results looked like this: 1.10.1.1, 10.10.1.1,
100.10.1.1, 1.1.1.1, 10.1.1.1, 100.1.1.1, etc?
What's wrong with results that look like:
But not to be a pest but what are the odds
the IANA would ever allocate the 1 and 100
nets to someone?
99%
But not to be a pest but what are the odds
the IANA would ever allocate the 1 and 100
nets to someone?
99%
I can't imagine 100.0.0.0/8 remaining reserved - there's nothing
particularly special about it (100=0x64... a number which represented
in hex has digits which form a power of two
On Fri, 30 May 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
10.12.22.2? Wouldnt it be easier if your test results looked
like this: 1.10.1.1, 10.10.1.1, 100.10.1.1, 1.1.1.1, 10.1.1.1,
100.1.1.1, etc?
Those aren't very human parsable in my eyes - too close to one another.
Why not use 10/8, 241/8 and, and
Bill Manning wrote:
that said, as long as your lab is never going to
connect to the Internet, you may want to consider
using the following prefixes:
[..]
127.0.0.0/8
I would not use 127.0.0.0/8 for anything.
Michel.
that would be you.
in 1989, i built a
On Fri, 30 May 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1.0.0.0 /8
10.0.0.0 /8
100.0.0.0 /8
I need 3 distinct zones which is why I wanted to separate
them out. In any case, I was wondering about the
status of the 1 /8 and the 100 /8 networks. What does
it mean that they are IANA reserved? Reserved
I'm tasked with coming up with an IP plan for an very large lab
network. I want to maximize route table manageability and
router/firewall log readability. I was thinking of building this
lab with the following address space:
1.0.0.0 /8
10.0.0.0 /8
100.0.0.0 /8
I encourage my competitors
On Fri, 30 May 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm tasked with coming up with an IP plan for an very large lab
network. I want to maximize route table manageability and
router/firewall log readability. I was thinking of building this
lab with the following address space:
1.0.0.0 /8
On Fri, 30 May 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RFC1918 is a set number of IP addresses. If you are working on a private
network lab that will be on the internet eventually or have parts on the
internet and exceeds the total number of IPV4 addressing set aside in
RFC1918, and IPV6 private
1.0.0.0 /8
10.0.0.0 /8
100.0.0.0 /8
I encourage my competitors to do this.
or read another way, this is fairly stupid, but as log as
this stupidity doesn't affect me, I don't care. However the
person tasked with cleaning tha crap up behind you may not feel
the same.
Doing
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Gerald wrote:
RFC1918 is a set number of IP addresses. If you are working on a private
network lab that will be on the internet eventually or have parts on the
internet and exceeds the total number of IPV4 addressing set aside in
RFC1918, and IPV6 private addressing is
On Fri, 30 May 2003, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
As a related question I guess I'd ask what sort of simulation requires
more than 16.7 million discreet ipv4 adresses (1/256 of the whole) in
order too simulate a reasonable subset of the whole ipv4 internet.
I don't have an answer for that one. :-) I
On Sat, 31 May 2003 00:54:07 EDT, Gerald said:
10.0.0.0/8 16,777,214 unique hosts maximum
192.168.0.0/16 65,534 unique hosts maximum
172.16.0.0/12 1,048,574 unique hosts maximum
Total: 17,891,322 unique addresses (before further subnetting)
However, see RFC3194.
pgp0.pgp
RFC1884 sets aside fec0::/10 for IPV6 Private addressing. That's enough to
fit all of IPV4 addressing inside of the private addressing alone. (Anyone
have a total number of unique hosts on that one?)
2^(128-10)
332306998946228968225951765070086144
Pete
As a related question I guess I'd ask what sort of simulation requires
more than 16.7 million discreet ipv4 adresses (1/256 of the whole) in
order too simulate a reasonable subset of the whole ipv4 internet.
Many products perform differently (though both performance levels might
be
I'm tasked with coming up with an IP plan for an very large lab
network. I want to maximize route table manageability and
router/firewall log readability. I was thinking of building this
lab with the following address space:
1.0.0.0 /8
10.0.0.0 /8
100.0.0.0 /8
I need 3 distinct zones which is
networks 1 and 100 are reserved for future delegation.
network 10 is delegated for private networks, such as your
lab.
if you use networks 1 and 100, you are hijacking these
numbers.
that said, as long as your lab is never going to connect
to the Internet, you may want to consider using the
become available some
day, correct?
Thanks to those who have responded so far.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 8:08 AM
To: Murphy, Brennan
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: IANA reserved Address Space
networks 1 and 100
27 matches
Mail list logo
