3 ms·
Yep, this is why I occasionally use reserved addresses other than the widely used RFC 1918 addresses. I use 192.0.2/24 ("TEST-NET") at home (cf. RFC 5737), spl
by jlgaddis 11y ago
Yep, this is why I occasionally use reserved addresses other than the widely used RFC 1918 addresses.
I use 192.0.2/24 ("TEST-NET") at home (cf. RFC 5737), split up into various subnets. At $work (ISP), we use 100.64/10 (cf. RFC 6598) quite a bit internally (for its intended purpose, *mostly). In other networks, such as companies with many locations that will be connected via VPNs or companies that will have several VPNs to other organizations (where there's less control of the addresses used), I've used 198.18/15 (cf. RFC 2544) to avoid any conflicts.
Obviously, this is not what those address ranges are intended to be used for but it's certainly better than both a) using non-reserved address ranges (i.e. public ones that don't belong to you) and b) implementing funky NAT policies because of overlapping addresses.