heads up on 80/8 [actually operational, so don't read this!!!]
John M . Brown
jmbrown at ihighway.net
Wed May 16 15:32:32 UTC 2001
While I could agree that its not a problem till someone tries to use it,
I point out that ARIN does make an announcement when they are going
to start issuing from a new IANA block.
We, The Net Operators, should have this information so that we can update
our filters, should we see fit to, and thus cause as little negative impact
Several of the sample filters I have seen just drop anything that is currently
NOT in the IRR space, otherwords the IANA reserved spaces, like 80/8
In fact if I remember correctly from the recent RIPE-39 meeting, its 80/7 that
they will be alloc'n from.
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 08:15:45AM -0700, Sean M. Doran wrote:
> | Several weeks old info. I am suprised that ICANN and or RIPE haven't made
> | the operational announcement to the NANOG or other lists.
> Not to invite a flamewar or anything, but it's not really
> an operational issue until some operator tries to route
> whatever they are allocated by the IRRs (RIPE, ARIN, APNIC).
> None of the IRRs (or ICANN) can really make ANY promise
> whatsoever that their allocations are globally routable.
> (This will be particularly true of ever-longer prefixes
> as they are allocated by various IRRs. IOW, who cares
> if the IRRs hand out /32s or /128s - just so long as
> people understand that the odds of global reachability in
> both steady state and during convergence [*] decrease
> roughly proportionally to the length of the prefix).
> So, this could well have been the first time an operator
> has found an operational issue with 80/8 that is relevant
> to the NANOG audience. :-)
> | Thanks for posting it to NANOG
> You're very welcome - hey, first public-act-of-smd in many days.
> - --
> Sean Doran <smd at use.net> / <smd at ebone.net>
> - --
> [*] http://www.ripe.net/docs/ripe-210.html
More information about the NANOG