nanog mailing list archives

RE: Get as much IP space as you ever dreamed of, was: Re: Looking to buy IPv4 addresses from class C swamp


From: "Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve () telecomplete co uk>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 16:18:51 +0100 (BST)



On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, Daniel Golding wrote:

And in the event the owner can't be contacted? And if contact is

Figure out a plan B..

successful, and the owner says "I'm just holding on to it because I like

Request they conform to the new administration

have 10 /24s" or, worse, he gets the clue and just starts advertising the
space, without using it? Then we have both address space waste and routing

Again, work out a plan and request they conform..

These are actions you can develop plans for, and whatever happens you increase 
your knowledge and remove a little more of the unknown swamp..

Steve


table bloat...

- dan

On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:

[Should non-routed addresses be revoked?]

No, but they should be watched to see if they remain unrouted and then
try to contact the owner..

On Mon, 28 Apr 2003, Temkin, David wrote:

And something else a lot of people tend to forget - just because space isn't
in the tables doesn't mean it's not in use.

Something of a waste?

There are companies that connect to thousands of other companies (see the
financial markets) that require unique addressing between companies with
non-colliding address ranges.  10.x.x.x doesn't quite cut it.

Why not? 16 million addresses arent enough? (and thats only 10/8)

RFC1918 does suggest non-public intra-company networks use private space.

Steve



-DT

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Sprunk [mailto:stephen () sprunk org]
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2003 6:01 PM
To: Daniel Golding; Kai Schlichting
Cc: North American Noise and Off-topic Gripes
Subject: Re: Get as much IP space as you ever dreamed of, was: Re: Looking
to buy IPv4 addresses from class C swamp



Thus spake "Daniel Golding" <dgold () FDFNet Net>
ARIN needs to repo any space that has [not] been advertised for a
reasonable length of time, and reissue it.

So you're claiming that ARIN should revoke any allocations, including those
made before it came into existence, simply because the addresses aren't in
the global tables?

If that's the position of the community, that's a drastic change from
assertions made in the IETF WGs and may affect address allocation guidelines
and even some protocol work.

S

Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking


IMPORTANT:The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the
sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its
attachments.  Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of
this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly
prohibited.  Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or
should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or
sell any security or other financial instrument.  Neither the sender, his or
her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as
to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein
or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.









Current thread: