Who has AS 1712?

Tue Nov 24 21:28:50 UTC 2009

 the joys of non-uniqueness.  ULAs are (going to be) your friends. :)

 back in the day, the IANA was pretty careful.  the contractors less so.
 SRI had the "connected" and "unconnected" databases - duplications abounded
 and when interconnection occured... renumbering ensued.  

 this is not a new or even recent problem.  It is certainly compounded by
 multiple actors and lack of clean slate.  Yet, I beleive that there will
 be a desire to "do the right thing" and this will get fixed.

 It might even lead to better tools and inter-actor releationships.

 Or it could melt into a pile of goo...

--bill

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 06:21:00AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
> > Of course if it was already assigned when IANA said that (no dates on 
> > the link above) then maybe the fault is more IANA's for telling another 
> > RIR that they could allocate an ASN that another RIR already allocated. 
> 
> i suspect that, in the erx project, there may have been more than one
> case of the iana saying "ok, X now manages this block, excpet of course
> for those pieces already allocated by Y and Z."  and the latter were not
> always well defined or easily learnable, and were not registered
> directly with the iana, but other rirs.
> 
> <rant>
> 
> and the data are all buried in whois, which is not well-defined, stats
> files, which are not defined, etc.  the rirs, in the thrall of nih (you
> did know that ripe/ncc invented the bicycle), spent decades not agreeing
> on common formats, protocols, or code.  this is one result thereof.
> testosterone kills, and the community gets the collateral damage.
> 
> randy