[PATCH] Don't treat 0/8 and 240/4 specially in IPv4 classification

[Martin Mareš]

Hello!

> Until 240/4 is officially marked as Internet and available for assignment,
> there is not only no reason to mark it as Internet in BIRD. You can use it
> now, BIRD doesn't do any difference between site-local and Internet routes.
[...]

Speaking as the person who likely introduced the IP address classification
scheme in BIRD years ago... :-)

I no longer think I have chosen wisely. Policy should be matter of configuration,
not hard-wired inside the code. Usability of 240/4 in various situations
is just matter of policy, I am not aware of any bit of Internet standards
which would proscribe its use. So it should be configurable.

On the other hand, the configuration should default to the safest choice,
which is rejecting these addresses.

This way, we both contribute to Internet reliability/security, and allow
people to experiment and burn their fingers as they wish.

---

0/8 is a slightly different story, but I am still in favor of making things
configurable instead of rejecting them unconditionally without a convincing
reason.

Also, I do not believe in our choice contributing to (non-)adoption of IPv6
in any measurable way. It might contribute to (non-)adoption of BIRD, though :)

				Have a nice fortnight
-- 
Martin `MJ' Mareš                        <mj at ucw.cz>   http://mj.ucw.cz/
United Computer Wizards, Prague, Czech Republic, Europe, Earth, Universe
"In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different." -- Larry McVoy