RFC1918 conformance

Gated allows you to specify the ospf router id. AS others have mentioned
so does Bay. Out of curiousity, is anyone running anything other than

I know it well (really we have few gated-based routers there). Let me to
point my mind - it may be usefull to have short reserved address space in
the beginning (net 1.0.0.0) and the end (223.255.0.0/16 or simular)
address space. CISCO's router-id was used as amazing example _why it mey
be usefull_.

I don't think that Internet engineering decisions should be based
solely on the basis of Cisco's bad decsisions regarding their OSPF
implementation. You claim that there are other reasons why reserving
1.0.0.0/8 and 223.255.0.0/16 are a good idea. Can you share some of
these reasons? I'm not totally against reserving these networks, but I
do require more convincing.

[A copy of the headers and the PGP signature follow.]