Architectural argument for another

prefix

Fred

RFC 1918

If the prefix is used to address private networks, and therefore free public address space for use in a network, Note that this was the intended use of the RFC

1918 address space: NATs had not been invented

If the address space is used for CGN:

10.0.0.0/8 172.16.0.0/12 192.168.0.0/16 10.0.0.0/8

?.?.?.?/??

Assume networks “south” of the CGN are NAT’d and use RFC 1918 address space

To route between address spaces, they have to have

separate addresses. Therefore, ?.?.?.?/??

Cannot be an RFC 1918 address

Wild woolyInternet