From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from full.lackof.org (full.lackof.org [204.13.164.203]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A3783B29D for ; Tue, 27 Feb 2024 21:31:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from [172.16.1.5] (97-113-137-41.tukw.qwest.net [97.113.137.41]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by full.lackof.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Tkz6C6MzNzyQr for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 02:37:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=lackof.org; s=2023; t=1709087859; bh=t5uJZIBFSeHQZACPkp/ZjWpeh1moyouMI/ItHnIIg8g=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=O3FQFrRMpDASAbEqT49OOq4Ht5eEHshbII4miy0Ukzi670AuSxmfX0nRhwEbC858N yP6U1IJKq1C1BD6lVnlE+BRsrZDPfa+YPtMeHI73jFAZbkPhtXHz6soVlYY9tSkk1S idvHc/lconT1s1HJf+odOY5OJHW7LO5Z9v/AROeF/7XOEv+csX2Sojn9uBbgoEX6xi nHJeOg2uFPZ9QUZOptoy76QJbbGlLmslsL3ZYY/nqde1Kg67/O7xQGm2ib/a+zUj2A vMIMhLIlsUFWHewVNCFEu/Q1/ScO1AGD6B5sIgNdAqdmcen42LxJvfE5PS99iR7uuA INATM7u5YQgdg== Message-ID: <855514eb-c402-4409-83b6-e0d682d0d94c@lackof.org> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2024 18:31:11 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US To: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net References: <1142E628-CF2B-4EDC-B4FD-46832B6D5840@gmail.com> From: Matt Taggart In-Reply-To: <1142E628-CF2B-4EDC-B4FD-46832B6D5840@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Bloat] mDNS X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 02:31:13 -0000 On 2/27/24 10:52, Rich Brown via Bloat wrote: > Exactly! There are no rules about what subnet range an ISP's gear will > assign to DHCP devices. > > So (I believe) it becomes incumbent on OpenWrt to be smarter than the > ISP's router (shouldn't be hard) and pick a separate subnet for its LAN > & wireless interface. (Clearly, OpenWrt could default to 192.168.1.0/24, > but if that's that range the ISP is using, it could switch to > 192.168.2.0/24. I think that's all the flexibility that's required...) Independent of which orgs are and are not allowed to use rfc1918 addresses... I sometimes find myself setting up openwrt routers behind other ISP provided NAT'ing routers that use rfc1918 addresses. Example: take a travel router on vacation and connect it to a network where I don't have any control over the ISP router, but I still want to get the advantages of: * my ESSID with my password, all my family's wifi devices "just work" * SQM for all the wifi/wired things I connect to it. Still could experience bufferbloat if there are things upstream of my router, but often that is zero devices, or just a "smart" tv. * firewalling all my devices together and away from other suspect stuff BTW the openwrt bcp38 packages have some automatic rfc1918 detection in order to make sure they don't setup a config that breaks in the case where WAN is rfc1918. Also... starting back in the old CeroWRT days I switched to using the 172.16 rfc1918 ranges when I realized that nobody else uses them, and that has been a good way to avoid collisions (but wouldn't work as an openwrt default). -- Matt Taggart matt@lackof.org