|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: IANA reserved Address Space
> This lab *could* be filled with millions of hosts (real/simulated) > and thousands of networks (real/simulated). This lab is yup. built several of those over the years. last simulated network had 100,000 networks, ASNs et.al. (built it all inside a single host!) > 1) create manageable and quickly adaptable firewall rulesets > 2) create an IP plan that will lend itself to quick human parsing > both in routing tables and router/firewall logs > 3) consider that the lab will likely have machines that require > patching/updates, etc from the real internet. if this is supposed to represent realworld, then use realworld numbers. design your lab so that patches/updates go to staging platforms and then pull into your lab from those - no direct network connections. > Imagine you want to create an environment for experiments. > You want to reduce complexity as much as possible and create > a scenario where feedback of a test is quick...doesnt require > much memorization of what is what and that allows you to suddenly > stop and rerun tests. Rapidly. Think of access lists,route tables, > firewall rulesets and logs. 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? perhaps I am unique, but I suffer from dyslexia. 1.1.10.0.1.1.0.0.0.0.1.1.1.11.0 looks way too much like binary to me. Much easier for machine parsing. Humans that I have worked with tend to discriminate easier on differing patterns. > > Thanks....I really appreciate everyone's feedback on this. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Murphy, Brennan > Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 9:21 AM > To: nanog@merit.edu > 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 on the internet... > something NAT couldnt fix. And the > responses saying use 1918 space point out > the potential problems were this lab ever > to leak out an advertisement on to the > internet, etc.... all advice I appreciate > people have taken the time to offer. > > But not to be a pest but what are the odds > the IANA would ever allocate the 1 and 100 > nets to someone? Is this an unpredictable > matter or is there a schedule of what's > next somewhere? Or which is more likely, the > world adopts IP v6 or the 1 and 100 nets > are deployed on the internet? :-) It is > apparent that I really want to use these > address ranges but I do need to grapple > with the possibility that this lab will > need internet connectivity at some point. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Murphy, Brennan > Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 8:49 AM > To: nanog@merit.edu > 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 it much > easier to "parse visually" my route tables. > Think of it as a "metric system" type of numbering > plan. The 1 and 100 nets would not be advertised > via BGP obviously...not a hijack situation at all. > > If I take into account the possibility that this > lab will have later requirements to connect to > the internet, all I have to do is have a NAT plan > in place...one that even takes into account that > the 1 and 100 nets could become available some > day, correct? > > Thanks to those who have responded so far. > > -----Original Message----- > From: bmanning@karoshi.com [mailto:bmanning@karoshi.com] > Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 8:08 AM > To: Murphy, Brennan > Cc: nanog@merit.edu > 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, you may want to consider using the following > prefixes: > > 4.0.0.0/8 > 38.0.0.0/8 > 127.0.0.0/8 > 192.0.0.0/8 > > > > > > > > > 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 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 for > > what? http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space > > > > Anyone else ever use IANA reserved address spacing for > > lab networks? Is there anything special I need to know? > > I'm under the impression that as long as I stay away > > from special use address space, I've got no worries. > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3330.txt > > > > Thanks, > > BM > > >
|