On 2012-08-24, at 7.01, Jerry jerry@seibercom.net wrote:
I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like the prudent thing to do.
I wonder whether it would be better to make the exclusion list configurable.
As I understand it, the intention is to avoid treating connections through a load balancer or proxy as though they're the same client device. The assumption that private address = proxy is a fair default, but some sites will be using public addresses for their proxies. And that's only going to increase with IPv6.
--
Matthew Powell matthew@atom.net