44/8

Fri Jul 19 03:21:58 UTC 2019

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:13 PM Majdi S. Abbas <msa at latt.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 11:02:40PM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> > So.. this is/was a legacy allocation, right?  with some 'not great'
> > contact/etc info...
>
>         It's been announced by UCSD as a /8, consistently available,
> with tunnel services and rDNS available on a consistent basis, for a
> long time.
>
>         The folks involved are not hard to find and never have been.
>
>         Amusingly, they still seem to be advertising the covering
> aggregate, so I guess the Cal system is going to provide transit to
> Amazon?  Do the Regents know about this arrangement?

who knows? probably? not really my personal concern I guess.

> > the ARIN folk could have said: "Well.... sure! if the current folk who
> > control access can positively show they do AND they don't mind parting
> > with a /10... ok?"
>
>         ... I'm not sure this would make the 44/8 allocation anything
> but a bogon, or ARIN WHOIS & RPKI a reliable resource for the community.
> Potentially quite the contrary.
>

I'm not sure how you're quite going in this direction...

>         If I start advertising space, and can show I thusly "control"
> it, can I monetize it, too?  I could use "some millions."
>

My guess is that arin needed more than just: "can control routing for
a few bits of time".
I don't really know, but I hope they had more requirements than that :)

I suppose though, are you more upset that the radio folk now have some
endowment (or what-have-you) or that the block is getting somewhat
chopped up?
their blog seems to indicate that there is plenty of space left, more
than they'd allocated previously (though I don't see any actioal
records).

They also state that the trust which was setup previously controled
the space and dealt with ARIN + the buyer.
it SEEMS above board... more above board than some other transactions
I've seen in the last while :(

Does it serve the larger community to get the space under RSA and
potentially signed in the RPKI? or to leave it where it was before?

-chris

>         --msa