Its not Q with the 1918 addressing. notice: 8 chi-edge-17.inet.qwest.net (205.171.20.154) 64 msec 64 msec 68 msec edge = elvis has left the building .chance -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of Alex Pilosov Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 8:16 PM To: Mark Mentovai Cc: Jade E. Deane; nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: Qwest/forthelife.net rfc1918 goodness On Sun, 10 Dec 2000, Mark Mentovai wrote:
I used to think that this was wrong also, and I would never build a network like that, but aside from making for ugly traceroutes, there's really nothing wrong with it. RFC 1918 doesn't address this issue
It, together with a martian ingress-filters break PMTU-D _IF_ any of the links between these routers has MTU less than 1500. This topic pops up on nanog every 4-6 months, but I doubt that it'll make home.net or qwest change their addressing schemes. -- Alex Pilosov | http://www.acecape.com/dsl CTO - Acecape, Inc. | AceDSL:The best ADSL in Bell Atlantic area 325 W 38 St. Suite 1005 | (Stealth Marketing Works! :) New York, NY 10018 |