Comments on: The Hazards of Not Using RFC 1918

By: hdmrg ycwfqz

hdmrg ycwfqz — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 10:09:45 +0000

rqtfehm zjebhtyc celg omqbcujp tewlcduxy hpitu gsczx

By: gwen

gwen — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 02:11:28 +0000

oops guess it dont matter

By: gwen

gwen — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 02:08:26 +0000

uh hate to tell u this but you transposed 169 in display to 196 in article.. perhaps arin should be rechecked?

By: Adam

Adam — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 10:44:05 +0000

So what if IE reported 192.168.0.1 as unsafe? Lots of people use those blocks for local addressing. If IE reported one of those sites as unsafe, then there would be lots of panicing people concerned that their systems had been hacked.
I think that using a Microsoft-operated address is the right choice here, but my employer may disagree. ;)

By: Nicko

Nicko — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:52:03 +0000

Apropos RFC 2606, I am reminded of this story at the Washington Post!