29 Jul
2021
29 Jul
'21
12:06 a.m.
On 28 Jul 2021, at 18:19, Ruben ON3RVH via 44Net
<44net(a)mailman.ampr.org> wrote:
You keep mentioning “ We have a large number of users that agree with this statement and
they want this private use case supported.” but no one was asked, there was no poll, no
onquiry,.. so how did you get the information that a large portion of users only want an
intranet?
We have approached a lot of the HAMNET communities and asked them if they want to be
routable on the Internet, and they said no. We have also reached out to communities in the
U.S. that have explained similar interest, or are doing this today already.
Everyone I talk to, everyone that wants an allocation
here in Belgium wants it to be publicly routable. Because that is what public ip space is
designed for.
I think that IPv4 space was designed before NAT existed. So it was actually designed with
this use case in mind: everything has a Global Unicast IPv4 address, and everything can
communicate with everything else, end to end.
But I am trying to understand: if we give you publicly routable IPv4, what is the problem
with other people getting non-publicly routable IPv4? We can foresee that we will be able
to accommodate all your current and future requests. Why is it a problem that some other
people need it for a different reason? I am really trying to understand from all these
e-mails what else we would do with the space..
Intranets should stick to rfc1918 adresses. There is
no need for an overlap, an isp will most likely give out ip’s in the 192.168 range. I know
of no ISP that gives out ip’s in the 10 range (agreed, I don’t know every isp) but even if
they used those ip’s on their wan side that would not conflict as the ham intranet would
be routed over a different or tunnel interface and should - never ever - be routed through
or by an isp router.
But still, what services do the current intranets offer that should be kept offline from
the public internet? And even then, it is easy to filter those ranges at the border.
Well, the idea is that you will be able to filter them from now on! Only accept 44.128/10
:)
You can never be sure with RFC1918 addresses because everyone can use them. A lot of ISPs
assign addresses from 10/8 to their customers, and then do NAT behind a single IP address
of hundreds or thousands of customers. So suddenly you have to renumber any ham radio
network that falls in the same subnet. VMWare may decide to assign VMs on computers 10/8
addresses (I think they do). Will you then renumber these people as well so people can run
VMware on computers that are part of this network? And then what if I want to run Docker?
It also uses parts of this space, too. Maybe my corporate VPN also uses 10/8. Will we
renumber every user every time some entity on the Internet decides to use 10/8?
That’s the reason we need global uniqueness and guarantee of non-overlapping addresses.
There’s nothing technical preventing anyone for using 44.128/10 as an Intranet, and it’s
the only reason we know to guarantee this uniqueness.
I hope this answers your questions,
Antonis