Re: [44net] use of 44-net behind NAT

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