How polluted is 1/8?

Wed Feb 3 20:19:16 UTC 2010

On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Joel M Snyder wrote:

> This information is very different from the RIPE Labs experiment which I 
> think showed that certain "obvious" addresses (1.1.1.1 seemed to be the 
> kicker in my short reading of their report) were being mis-used heavily.
>  But I suspect that 27/8 would have similar issues to 45/8.

I would hope that the APNIC would opt not to assign networks that would 
contain 1.1.1.1 or 1.2.3.4 to customers for exactly that reason.  The 
signal-to-noise ratio for those addresses is likely pretty high.  The 
noise is likely contained on many internal networks for now because a 
corresponding route doesn't show up in the global routing table at the 
moment.  Once that changes....

I could see holding those prefixes aside for research purposes (spam 
traps, honey pots, etc...).

jms