[pumplekin]

You should read https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1627 for a path not travelled.

Not everyone thought this was a good idea, and I still maintain the alternative path would have led to a better internet than the one we today.

[zokier]

As the authors themselves note, RFC 1597 was merely formalizing already widespread common practice. If the private ranges were not standardized then people would still have created private networks, but just used some random squatted blocks. I can not see that being better outcome.

[wongarsu]

The optimist in me wants to claim that not assigning any range for local networks would have lead to us running out of IPv4 addresses in the late 90s, leading to the rapid adoption of IPv6, along with some minor benefits (merging two private networks would be trivial, much fewer NATs in the world leading to better IP based security and P2P connectivity).

The realists in me expects that everyone would have used one of the ~13 /8 blocks assigned to the DoD

[high_priest]

Can you please elaborate? How would such a minute change lead to "a better internet"?

[emacsen]

I'm not the OP or author, but the argument against private network addresses is that such addresses break the Internet in some fundamental ways. Before I elaborate on the argument, I want to say that I have mixed feelings on the topic myself.

Let's start with a simple assertion: Every computer on the Internet has an Internet address.

If it has an Internet Address, it should be able to send packets to any computer on the Internet, and any other computer on the Internet should be able to send packets to it.

Private networks break this assumption. Now we have machines which can send packets out, but can't receive packets, not without either making firewall rule exceptions or else doing other firewall tricks to try to make it work. Even then, about 10-25% of the time, it doesn't work.

But it goes beyond firewall rules... with IP addresses being tied to a device, every ISP would be giving every customer a block of addresses, both commercial and residential customers.

We'd also have seen fast adoption of IPv6 when IPv4 ran out. Instead we seem to be stuck in perpetual limbo.

On team anti-private networking addresses:

- Worse service from ISPs - IPv4 still in use past when it should have been replaced - Complex work around overcoming firewalls

I'm sure we all know the benefits of private networks, so I don't need to reiterate it.