Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 11:51:52 +0200 From: Jonathan McKeown <jonathan@scatterlings.org> To: Dewayne Geraghty <dewayne@heuristicsystems.com.au> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IETF proposal to unicast 127.1/16 - should we be concerned? Message-ID: <CAOLAi31CaadN4shwFXzXKPN=y3B4aXrFfq9XQ4ND%2B%2BBp_4rehA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <c78136bc-57ec-e97b-82c5-e6ff2da8e50a@heuristicsystems.com.au> References: <c78136bc-57ec-e97b-82c5-e6ff2da8e50a@heuristicsystems.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--000000000000540ca005d10d1c70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, 18 Nov 2021, 07:50 Dewayne Geraghty, < dewayne@heuristicsystems.com.au> wrote: > As this is an individual proposal within the IETF framework, the concern > should be tempered, however the draft proposal for 127.1/16 to be > routable is being discussed. > As I read it, the proposal is more wide-ranging than that, allowing all of 127/8 to be routable with the exception of 127.0/16 which is still reserved for loopback. > --000000000000540ca005d10d1c70--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOLAi31CaadN4shwFXzXKPN=y3B4aXrFfq9XQ4ND%2B%2BBp_4rehA>