29 Apr
2013
29 Apr
'13
5:54 p.m.
On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 05:25:45PM -0400, Jim Alles wrote:
Is this the best way to address devices when doing NAT
into a private
network? Any issues?
I'll have to update that entry on the wiki for 44.128/16; its definition
was originally as a test-only subnet. I don't know that it's used much for
that anymore. It might be time to return it to general assignment like
any other regional subnet.
In general, I feel its unwise to use addresses that appear to be world
routable (eg, 44.anything) in the private netspace behind NATs and
firewalls. The confusion that results when they inadvertently leak out
just isn't worth it. There are designated private networks (RFC1918)
that are a wiser choice for behind a NAT gateway.
- Brian