Re: Last Resort Registries
- Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 22:59:22 +0200 (MET DST)
>
> Perhaps you don't have big companies in Switzerland, whatever do I know
> about Switzerland. But there are cases when Big Company connect to a
> small outside company, providing something special and as Small Company
> don't connect to Internet they must use RFC 1597 and eventually
> Small-2 has been told the same story and use the same first numbers
> from RFC 1597, but when Big Company want to have a link to Small-2
> as well, this becomes a problem.
If you'd followed the IETF list you would know that I made a comment
pointing these problems out a -long- time ago, in particular from the
point of collisions RFC-1597 is substantially worse than picking
addresses at random (and no better than the time honored tradition
of using addresses from Sun).
>
> Simon, you don't seem to understand the real problem. Coordination
> has to be done on every possible level. Personally I don't care
> whatsoever about those that we force to use private address space,
> but they will eventually run into problems, so beeing last-resort
> we ouht to take our responsibilty and coordinate thing that are
> currently in a mess.
Private addres space is -private-: useful for networking all the
power meters in Switzerland and similar sensible things, it cannot be
an ersatz public address space.
In your example: where do you stop? What happens if Big Company wants
to connect to companies in Denmark and Norway (and Switzerland and
Germany and France and Italy .......)? You ARE creating a second
public address space.
Simon
