Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations
David Miller
david at dirigo.mint.net
Fri Feb 2 19:29:09 UTC 1996
On Fri, 2 Feb 1996, Howard Berkowitz wrote:
> > > We are working on the 192.x.x.x swamp right now.
> > > Rough estimates (with much more accurate data @ NANOG)
> > >
> > > 60% - invalid or missing contact information
> >
> > This is interesting. How about a policy that says if nobody can contact you
> > and none of your addresses are reachable, then after some period, your
> > addresses get recycled.
> >
> >
> By addresses not being reachable, are you effectively saying that any
> enterprise that does not want to connect to the Internet must use
> RFC1597 address space?
>
> Anyone have an idea how much of the address space is used for
> registered addresses of organizations that do not connect to the Internet?
I would also be curious how the 60% missing is counted.
If an organization places 99% of their addresses behind a firewall do all
those not count?
Unfortunately, I don't think we can base much policy on whether or what %
of addresses are reachable from the internet.
--- David Miller
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's *amazing* what one can accomplish when
one doesn't know what one can't do!
More information about the NANOG
mailing list