Rogers Canada using 126.96.36.199/8 for internal address space
wavetossed at googlemail.com
Wed May 25 00:25:43 CDT 2011
On 25 May 2011 04:22, Jeremy <jbaino at gmail.com> wrote:
> Please excuse my ignorance on this and note that I am not condoning the
> hijacking of IP address space.
> As long as necessary precautions are taken (route filters, tunnels, VRF's)
> shouldn't this be technically feasible without any negative ramifications?
And that is why the US military is unlikely to contact anyone at Rogers.
Lots of other companies have hijacked space like this. As I recall,
Reuters global networks began using 7/8 (along with a whole bunch of
other low numbered /8's), back in the mid 90's and nobody has
complained about that.
This kind of thing is becoming more common as more companies exhaust
the RFC 1918 space, and the DOD addresses are the prime target for
this "borrowing" activity because most folks feel that the DOD isn't
likely to run into any technical networking problems with this
So we should CONDONE such borrowing and recommend a couple of /8s to
use in North America. Perhaps one could be DOD for those operators
that do not carry any DOD traffic and one could be that /8 from
Softbank Japan, 126/8 if I recall it correctly. People who carry DOD
traffic could borrow the APNIC block.
This actually reduces the pressure on the IPv4 address supply without
expensive carrier grade NAT services and makes the transition to IPv6
More information about the NANOG