RE: rfc 1918?

[Mark Borchers <mborchers () splitrock net>]

> This is not an issue of paranoia (except for those who actually use
> PRIVATE addresses internally and have properly configured 
> their gateways
> to be paranoid about even seeing such packets, let alone 
> routing them).

Unless I'm mistaken, a prime reason for the evolution of RFC 1918
addresses was that it was once common practice for people to
help themselves to PUBLIC address space to use on PRIVATE
networks.  As the world got more connected, these addresses
occasionally got leaked and caused address conflicts.  

Using RFC 1918 addresses prevents conflicts with public/registered
space.  Obviously the possibility of leakage still exists,
but with RFC 1918 the havoc potential is diminished to a mere
irritant level.  Which is what the incident that started this
thread appeared to be.