[ppml] Policy Proposal 2004-3 Global Addresses for Private Network Inter -Connectivity

[leo vegoda]

Hi,

Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:

[...]

>>you can look at how apnic and ripe now phrase it.  i think it is
>>more "you may want to look at" or something.
> 
> I think it is even just a question "Have you considered?", which I 
> think is more fair. I tend to agree with Randy. Being a non-native to 
> the language, "encourage" to me reads as if we know that one technology 
> is more superior to the other, while in reality the other way around 
> holds.

The RIPE IPv4 policy document has the following text on private address
space and NATs:

    Some address ranges are set aside for the operation of private IP
    networks. Anyone may use these addresses in their private networks
    without registration or co-ordination. Hosts using these addresses
    cannot directly be reached from the Internet. Such connectivity is
    enabled by using the technique known as Network Address Translation
    (NAT). Private addresses restrict a network so that its hosts only
    have partial Internet connectivity. Where full Internet connectivity
    is needed, unique, public addresses should be used.

    For a detailed description of “Address Allocation for Private
    Internets” and the actual ranges of addresses set aside for that
    purpose, please refer to RFC 1918 found at:
    ftp://ftp.ripe.net/rfc/rfc1918.txt

    For information on the “Architectural Implications of NAT”, please
    refer to RFC 2993, found at:
    ftp://ftp.ripe.net/rfc/rfc2993.txt

It's possible that improvements to the RIPE text could also be made.

Regards,

-- 
leo vegoda
RIPE NCC
Registration Services Manager