not in the databases

Philip Smith pfs at cisco.com
Tue Nov 27 22:21:48 UTC 2001

My theory is that DISO-UNRRA were originally allocated through in the classful world - these are all in the ARIN DB under 
various military guises. When CIDR came along, it seems that someone must 
have decided that because was now available and part of a 
bigger block, it could be added to the announcement, etc...?

There are a total of four like this:

Network            Origin AS  Description           568     DISO-UNRRA         10455     Lucent Technologies           568     DISO-UNRRA           568     DISO-UNRRA

Just a theory - but the above 4 could do with the x.0.0.0/16 being put in 
ARIN's db, if the allocation can be proven...


At 12:03 27/11/2001 -0500, Leo Bicknell wrote:

>On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 06:56:40PM +0200, Rafi Sadowsky wrote:
> >  Says who ? - maybe you didn't check the right one ?
>Perhaps I should restate my complaint a bit.  I think all three
>of these stand on their own.
>* If sub-bits of an allocation are in the ARIN database,
>   I think the supernet should be in the ARIN database.
>* ARIN seems to have a good many, if not all of the .MIL
>   supernets, but doesn't have this one.
>* Having .MIL say they have address space is not proof
>   that they own the whole block, anymore than www.ufp.org saying
>   I now own 20 class A's is proof that they are mine.
>In any event, I'd just like network lookups to work in some sane
>way, so when operators need to check something they can get accurate
>        Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
>         PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
>Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org

More information about the NANOG mailing list