3 ms·
Found this link in one of the responses on that page: https://superuser.com/questions/784978/why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip
by egwynn 8y ago
Found this link in one of the responses on that page:
https://superuser.com/questions/784978/why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class https://superuser.com/questions/784978/why-did-the-ietf-spec...
Similarly, I expect Postel picked 192.168 because, at the time he made the
choice, it was the next available, or nearly the next available, network to be
assigned from the former Class C space. This probably can't be proved one way
or the other, but the pace of address assignments shown in the RFCs strongly
suggests that they would have been in this general vicinity around 1993-1994
when the assignments were made. (Addresses in 192.159 were being assigned in
1992. No dates are available for assignments in 192.160-192.167 as these were
at some point reallocated to RIPE.)
- danpat 8y agoTo be clear, the 192 part is the lowest "Class C" network prefix. The 168 part was the arbitrary time-dependent part from the allocation database.
- egwynn 8y agoCorrect, thanks for making that explicit.
- WalterGR 8y agoText formatted as code on HN is very difficult to read when on mobile. Using italics or > to quote things is better. Similarly, I expect Postel picked 192.168 because, at the time he made the choice, it was the next available, or nearly the next available, network to be assigned from the former Class C space. This probably can't be proved one way or the other, but the pace of address assignments shown in the RFCs strongly suggests that they would have been in this general vicinity around 1993-1994 when the assignments were made. (Addresses in 192.159 were being assigned in 1992. No dates are available for assignments in 192.160-192.167 as these were at some point reallocated to RIPE.)