RE: [address-policy-wg] RE: Private address space in IPv4 and IPv6 [was something irrelevantly titled]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Davidson [mailto:andy@nosignal.org]
> Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2009 10:55 AM
> To: Potapov Vladislav
> Cc: address-policy-wg@ripe.net
> Subject: Re: [address-policy-wg] RE: Private address space in IPv4 and
> IPv6 [was something irrelevantly titled]
> 
> 
> On 29 May 2009, at 11:16, <poty@iiat.ru> <poty@iiat.ru> wrote:
> 
> > Then Radianz could easily create its own rules without bothering the
> > World, couldn't it? And so - use ANY IP addresses. Why should I see
> > the
> > internal networks (I use corrected "private" meanings) of Radianz or
> > other such companys? If it is NEVER interact with my or the most of
> > other networks in the Internet?
> 
> Hi, Vladislav
> 
> As others have tried to point out, private networks often still
> connect to the Internet, so in order to prevent connectivity problems
> between -- in this case, Radianz -- and another, unspecified network
> on the Internet, then the addressing that Radianz need to use for
> their private networks must be globally unique.
Here we have several possibilities:
1. We have a tunnel between the internal networks - then Radianz network
do not need to be GLOBALLY unique, it should be unique only between
interconnected networks.
2. The same network should have access to the Internet. Then it should
use NAT (not possibly in IPv6) or just be partially connected to the
Internet. The second case - is announcing the block (or part of the
block) to the Internet. The first case - internal network may have RFC
1918 or other IP addresses.

> 
> Kind regards,
> Andy Davidson

Vladislav Potapov
Ru.iiat