This explains the reason private ranges were designated but not why 192.168.0.0 in particular within the Class C range was designated to be private. Does anyone know why that number in particular was chosen?
https://superuser.com/questions/784978/why-did-the-ietf-spec...
Similarly, I expect Postel picked 192.168 because, at the time he made the
choice, it was the next available, or nearly the next available, network to be
assigned from the former Class C space. This probably can't be proved one way
or the other, but the pace of address assignments shown in the RFCs strongly
suggests that they would have been in this general vicinity around 1993-1994
when the assignments were made. (Addresses in 192.159 were being assigned in
1992. No dates are available for assignments in 192.160-192.167 as these were
at some point reallocated to RIPE.)Similarly, I expect Postel picked 192.168 because, at the time he made the choice, it was the next available, or nearly the next available, network to be assigned from the former Class C space. This probably can't be proved one way or the other, but the pace of address assignments shown in the RFCs strongly suggests that they would have been in this general vicinity around 1993-1994 when the assignments were made. (Addresses in 192.159 were being assigned in 1992. No dates are available for assignments in 192.160-192.167 as these were at some point reallocated to RIPE.)
Other than the class portion of the addressing, this is no more significant than when engineers use A5 and 5A for markers (1010 0101 0101 1010).
Or, so it would seem. :)