The Department of Work and Pensions, UK has an entire /8
mysidia at gmail.com
Thu Sep 20 02:32:00 UTC 2012
On 9/19/12, John Osmon <josmon at rigozsaurus.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 12:07:33AM -0500, Jimmy Hess wrote:
>> But your unconnected network, is unaffected.
> Ahh... But the network may not be unconnected. Just because *you*
> don't have a path to it doesn't mean others are similarly disconnected.
I'm aware of the existence of networks that are only connected to
limited number of networks. The fact that they exist, doesn't
particularly diminish the danger,
that their "apparently unused" addressing will become a target for someone.
It would be wrong and broken, but that doesn't mean it is not going to happen.
> Such a network would not have $0 in loss/damage when the partners can't
> reach it due to a rogue announcement.
If they wanted to make a case about it, they would likely need to find
evidence that outweighs even their own negligence in the matter.
There's no accepted practice that says accept inter-domain
announcements for your own prefixes that aren't supposed to be
announced outside your network....
The announcement also wouldn't be rogue, if the announcer had
persuaded the RIR under whatever policy was in effect at the time, to
assign the addresses.
There's a fork there, between two different sorts of risks....
* (Non-legitimate) Example: Some networks run by massive Tier 1
providers that for whatever reason decides to stop accepting the
whole concept of "unconnected networks", an example of this would
be Bell Canada, Level3, ATT, or Verizon just decides to pick some
random /8 they see as "unconnected", claim that /8 and start
announcing it, and starts renumbering massive numbers of CPEs into
Within a couple weeks, each of the other Tier 1s, "grabs" one of
those "unconnected" /8s; or the Tier1's work out a deal to share
it, totally outside the RIR process.
A second similar, but totally unrelated risk, for the operator of the
is their RIR policies are adjusted, and revokation of the " perceived
> The Internet is not the same from all viewpoints.
That works, until there is a sufficient scarcity of resources to make
major players desparate.
Ultimately it will be the management of networks with the largest
numbers of eyeballs, that decide which viewpoint is "correct".
More information about the NANOG