Why are private IP addresses the way they are?

Question

Computer networks

10.0.0.0/8
172.16.0.0/12
192.168.0.0/16

Why are these ranges so far away? Why couldn't it be done, let's say this:
10.0.0.0/8
11.0.0.0/12
12.0.0.0/16

Answer 1

Answer from the creators of RFC1918.

Answer 2

RFC - https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1918
upd Indeed, DevMan 's answer (more precisely, comments to it) supplements in part

Why are these ranges so far away?

here is a pretty clear explanation
_ _ to the class, when routing. and the discrepancy between the length of the mask 172.16.0.0/12 and 192.168.0.0/16 that is visible to the eye with the declared classes, in fact, is not such - both ranges are recommended as sets of networks of classes B and C, respectively , but not as fully accessible ranges: not 172.16 .0.0/12 - but 16 networks from 172.16.0.0/16 to 172.31.0.0/16 are not 192.168.0.0/16 - but 256 networks from 192.168.0.0/24 to 192.168.255.0/24
but no one forbids violating these recommendations using these networks not strictly B and C. just like 10.0.0.0/8 all the time, it is used to divide large corporate networks into much smaller segments

Answer 3

Initially, ip was allocated to large organizations such as the Pentagon. The Pentagon for security reasons banned the Internet routing of allocated IP addresses. so they became local. something like that I heard, maybe it's a bike

Answer 4

because that's how it is in the RFC