Paetec PI space?

Adam Greene maillist at webjogger.net
Wed Jun 26 21:11:28 UTC 2013


Thanks everyone.

It sounds like (a) customer needs to clarify contract terms with Paetec, and
(b) unless they have an ongoing relationship, the best long-term plan is to
renumber. 

I did check reg dates on the blocks, and it is much more recent than the
customer led me to believe (or than I interpreted) ... so I suspect this is
less something which simply dropped off the map and more of an above-board
and possibly ongoing relationship than I suspected. The customer does
provide voice service, so there may be something going on behind the scenes
which makes sense from an authoritative routing perspective. 

Thanks for your help. This customer seems to be responsible so I suspect I
may not have all the details and overstated the issue.

-----Original Message-----
From: bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com [mailto:bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 3:45 PM
To: Joe Abley
Cc: Adam Greene; nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: Paetec PI space?


f the assignment predated ARIN, then its not clear if current ARIN policy is
applicable.


On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 02:18:54PM -0400, Joe Abley wrote:
> 
> On 2013-06-26, at 13:52, "Adam Greene" <maillist at webjogger.net> wrote:
> 
> > We have a customer who was assigned some PI IPv4 space by Paetec back in
> > mid-90's
> 
> I think it's correct to say that the only entities that can assign PI IPv4
space are RIRs and the IANA. If I'm right, what you're talking about is PA
space, regardless of claims made by your customer or Paetec.
> 
> 
> Joe
> 
> 





More information about the NANOG mailing list