How polluted is 1/8?
Justin M. Streiner
streiner at cluebyfour.org
Thu Feb 4 14:26:34 UTC 2010
On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Nathan Ward wrote:
> On 4/02/2010, at 9:19 AM, Justin M. Streiner wrote:
>> I would hope that the APNIC would opt not to assign networks that
>> would contain 126.96.36.199 or 188.8.131.52 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....
> 1.1.1/24 and 1.2.3/24 are assigned to APNIC. Unless they release them,
> the general public will not get addresses in these.
Yes, I did see that. What I noticed yesterday was that there were no
prefixes that cover 184.108.40.206 or 220.127.116.11 being announced globally at that
More information about the NANOG