[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael O'Donnell) writes:
> While trying to read a WWW page from a site mentioned
> in Slashdot I noticed that it was only intermittently
> accessibile,
Note: the fact that this site was "only intermittently accessibile"
probably has more to do with the site getting slashdotted or maybe its
network connection is inherently flakey or maybe it's under a Code Red
attack or...
The fact that one of the carriers is using a RFC1918 address for their
internal router communications *probably* isn't the cause of this
observed behavior.
> Isn't it borken for that site to have an address in the 192.168.* range?
Oh, yes, it's "borken". In fact, this is probably the best term for
it... (-:
But is this "broken"? Well, *very technically*, yes, but in general,
the fact that they've violated the RFC1918 rules isn't precluding you
from sending packets to and from this endpoint.
If, for some reason, you had some reason to send packets directly to
one of these intermediate routers with a RFC1918 address, then the
"brokenness" of this situation would present a real problem to you.
But you're probably not doing this, so this really shouldn't be a
problem for you.
A lot of carriers are using such addresses for their internal routes
*right now*.
Of course, the best way to fix all of this is to deploy IPv6...
--kevin
--
"Bork! Bork! Bork!"
-- from the alt.swedish.chef.bork.bork.bork FAQ
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
