[ppml] POC verification process

[william at elan.net]

Overall this situation seems to indicate that we need additional ip blocks 
to be reserved as non-routabled ip space (that everybody would also knew 
about and would filter at the router level). I'd say /1 and /2 are good 
choices for it. The idea would be to specify that 10.x is to be used for 
LAN while /1 or /2 is said to be used for WAN (meaning global scale) 
private networks. In addition somebody can keep track of all these private 
"WANs" and registries involved (like we already have WIANA discussed before)
so that different industries not start to have duplicate private network 
operators (or if they do so we at least knew who they are).

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Bill Van Emburg wrote:

> What each of you who is following an argument similar to Ian's appears
> to be missing is that it is a very real problem for enterprises that are
> interconnected to avoid conflicting IP space, even within RFC 1918
> addresses.  In any case, they certainly don't globally coordinate their
> use of the private IP space.
> 
> It is also not possible to simply grab a slice of public IP space, even
> though the networks involved will not connect to the Internet.  This is
> because the enterprise would lose the ability to communicate with a
> piece of the Internet, since they would be routing that slice of
> addresses to a private network instead.
> 
> At a previous venture, we used a slice of public IP space assigned to us
> for a network that would never see Internet-routed packets.  The reason
> for this was that we were interconnecting the private networks of
> multiple customers.  Each customer made use of the private IP space, and
> their various uses of it conflicted with each other.  All of them needed
> to get packets to our back end network.  The only way to ensure that a
> conflict of addressing could be avoided was to use addresses that would
> never be used on any customer's private network, and that would never
> need to be routed from our own internal network to the Internet.  The
> only way to do *that* is with a slice of public IP space that we *know*
> is never going to be used by anyone else -- one that we had assigned to us.
> 
> Do you understand the issue?  I happen to think that the idea presented
> here is an excellent one, as it handles one of the largest examples of
> such a case.  I would venture to guess that I was not the first one to
> think of doing as we did in my example above....