回答編集履歴
6
補足
answer
CHANGED
|
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
|
|
|
2
2
|
> 172/8 Administered by ARIN
|
|
3
3
|
|
|
4
4
|
ARIN管理となっていたので、[ARAIN](https://www.arin.net/)のページをグーグルのサイト検索「site:www.arin.net 172 arin」で検索した所
|
|
5
|
-
[IPV4 PRIVATE ADDRESS SPACE AND FILTERING](https://www.arin.net/knowledge/address_filters.html)
|
|
5
|
+
[IPV4 PRIVATE ADDRESS SPACE AND FILTERING | ARAIN](https://www.arin.net/knowledge/address_filters.html)
|
|
6
6
|
|
|
7
7
|
> In August 2012, ARIN began allocating "172" address space to internet service, wireless and content providers.
|
|
8
8
|
|
|
@@ -11,10 +11,12 @@
|
|
|
11
11
|
|
|
12
12
|
---
|
|
13
13
|
2018/09/16夜追記
|
|
14
|
-
探していてやっと見つけました。
|
|
15
|
-
[why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class](https://superuser.com/questions/784978/why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class)
|
|
14
|
+
上記内容は根拠が薄かったので、他の根拠を探していてやっと見つけました。
|
|
15
|
+
[why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class | superuser](https://superuser.com/questions/784978/why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class)
|
|
16
16
|
|
|
17
|
-
[RFC 1918 network range choices](https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2017-October/092636.html)
|
|
17
|
+
[RFC 1918 network range choices | nanog](https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2017-October/092636.html)
|
|
18
|
+
> As far as I recall the choice of the particular ranges were as follows:
|
|
19
|
+
>
|
|
18
20
|
> 10/8: the ARPANET had just been turned off. One of us suggested it and
|
|
19
21
|
> Jon considered this a good re-use of this "historical" address block. We
|
|
20
22
|
> also suspected that "net 10" might have been hard coded in some places,
|
|
@@ -27,6 +29,7 @@
|
|
|
27
29
|
|
|
28
30
|
RFC1918の共同著者(D. Karrenberg氏)による説明だと**未割り当て**のIPアドレスを選んだとのこと。
|
|
29
31
|
よって影響は無いというのが回答です。
|
|
32
|
+
※文中のJonは[Jon Postel氏](https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%B8%E3%83%A7%E3%83%B3%E3%83%BB%E3%83%9D%E3%82%B9%E3%83%86%E3%83%AB)のことかと。
|
|
30
33
|
|
|
31
34
|
あと検索時に見つけた参考情報
|
|
32
|
-
[IANA IPv4 Special-Purpose Address Registry](https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry/iana-ipv4-special-registry.xhtml)
|
|
35
|
+
[IANA IPv4 Special-Purpose Address Registry | IANA](https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry/iana-ipv4-special-registry.xhtml)
|
5
追記
answer
CHANGED
|
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
|
|
|
25
25
|
>
|
|
26
26
|
> 192.168/16: the lowest unallocated /16 in class C block 192/8.
|
|
27
27
|
|
|
28
|
-
RFC1918の共同著者による説明だと**未割り当て**のIPアドレスを選んだとのこと。
|
|
28
|
+
RFC1918の共同著者(D. Karrenberg氏)による説明だと**未割り当て**のIPアドレスを選んだとのこと。
|
|
29
29
|
よって影響は無いというのが回答です。
|
|
30
30
|
|
|
31
31
|
あと検索時に見つけた参考情報
|
4
追記
answer
CHANGED
|
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
|
|
|
10
10
|
RFC1597の発行時(1994年時点)はIPアドレスの割当が行われていなかったという回答になります。
|
|
11
11
|
|
|
12
12
|
---
|
|
13
|
-
2018/09/
|
|
13
|
+
2018/09/16夜追記
|
|
14
14
|
探していてやっと見つけました。
|
|
15
15
|
[why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class](https://superuser.com/questions/784978/why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class)
|
|
16
16
|
|
|
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
|
|
|
25
25
|
>
|
|
26
26
|
> 192.168/16: the lowest unallocated /16 in class C block 192/8.
|
|
27
27
|
|
|
28
|
-
RFC1918の共同著者による
|
|
28
|
+
RFC1918の共同著者による説明だと**未割り当て**のIPアドレスを選んだとのこと。
|
|
29
29
|
よって影響は無いというのが回答です。
|
|
30
30
|
|
|
31
31
|
あと検索時に見つけた参考情報
|
3
追記
answer
CHANGED
|
@@ -15,8 +15,18 @@
|
|
|
15
15
|
[why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class](https://superuser.com/questions/784978/why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class)
|
|
16
16
|
|
|
17
17
|
[RFC 1918 network range choices](https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2017-October/092636.html)
|
|
18
|
+
> 10/8: the ARPANET had just been turned off. One of us suggested it and
|
|
19
|
+
> Jon considered this a good re-use of this "historical" address block. We
|
|
20
|
+
> also suspected that "net 10" might have been hard coded in some places,
|
|
21
|
+
> so re-using it for private address space rather than in inter-AS routing
|
|
22
|
+
> might have the slight advantage of keeping such silliness local.
|
|
23
|
+
>
|
|
18
|
-
|
|
24
|
+
> 172.16/12: the lowest unallocated /12 in class B space.
|
|
25
|
+
>
|
|
26
|
+
> 192.168/16: the lowest unallocated /16 in class C block 192/8.
|
|
19
27
|
|
|
28
|
+
RFC1918の共同著者による解説だとクラスBとクラスCは**未割り当て**の番号を選んだとのこと。
|
|
29
|
+
よって影響は無いというのが回答です。
|
|
20
30
|
|
|
21
31
|
あと検索時に見つけた参考情報
|
|
22
32
|
[IANA IPv4 Special-Purpose Address Registry](https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry/iana-ipv4-special-registry.xhtml)
|
2
みつけたあああああ
answer
CHANGED
|
@@ -9,5 +9,14 @@
|
|
|
9
9
|
Whoisで172.0.0.1のIPアドレスを引くとRegDate:2012-08-20となっているので、
|
|
10
10
|
RFC1597の発行時(1994年時点)はIPアドレスの割当が行われていなかったという回答になります。
|
|
11
11
|
|
|
12
|
+
---
|
|
13
|
+
2018/09/18追記
|
|
14
|
+
探していてやっと見つけました。
|
|
15
|
+
[why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class](https://superuser.com/questions/784978/why-did-the-ietf-specifically-choose-192-168-16-to-be-a-private-ip-address-class)
|
|
16
|
+
|
|
17
|
+
[RFC 1918 network range choices](https://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2017-October/092636.html)
|
|
18
|
+
RFC1918の著者による解説だと**未割り当て**の番号を選んだとのこと。
|
|
19
|
+
|
|
20
|
+
|
|
12
21
|
あと検索時に見つけた参考情報
|
|
13
22
|
[IANA IPv4 Special-Purpose Address Registry](https://www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv4-special-registry/iana-ipv4-special-registry.xhtml)
|
1
追記
answer
CHANGED
|
@@ -1,5 +1,7 @@
|
|
|
1
|
-
[
|
|
1
|
+
[IANA IPv4 Address Space Registry | IANA](https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.xhtml)を見る限りでは
|
|
2
|
-
|
|
2
|
+
> 172/8 Administered by ARIN
|
|
3
|
+
|
|
4
|
+
ARIN管理となっていたので、[ARAIN](https://www.arin.net/)のページをグーグルのサイト検索「site:www.arin.net 172 arin」で検索した所
|
|
3
5
|
[IPV4 PRIVATE ADDRESS SPACE AND FILTERING](https://www.arin.net/knowledge/address_filters.html)
|
|
4
6
|
|
|
5
7
|
> In August 2012, ARIN began allocating "172" address space to internet service, wireless and content providers.
|