Attention Required! | Cloudflare
lists.ding.net
  • Scipitie@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    7·
    8 hours ago

    For the non link clickers. I give it interesting enough:

    On 05/10/2017 07:40, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:

    Does anyone have a pointer to an authoritative source on why

    10/8 172.16/12 and 192.168/16

    were the ranges chosen to enshrine in the RFC? …

    The RFC explains the reason why we chose three ranges from “Class A,B & C” respectively: CIDR had been specified but had not been widely implemented. There was a significant amount of equipment out there that still was “classful”.

    As far as I recall the choice of the particular ranges were as follows:

    10/8: the ARPANET had just been turned off. One of us suggested it and Jon considered this a good re-use of this “historical” address block. We also suspected that “net 10” might have been hard coded in some places, so re-using it for private address space rather than in inter-AS routing might have the slight advantage of keeping such silliness local.

    172.16/12: the lowest unallocated /12 in class B space.

    192.168/16: the lowest unallocated /16 in class C block 192/8.

    In summary: IANA allocated this space just as it would have for any other purpose. As the IANA, Jon was very consistent unless there was a really good reason to be creative.

    Daniel (co-author of RFC1918)