Re: IAB and "private" numbering

[Geoff Huston <gih () apnic net>]

> Example registered but not 'routed': 7.0.0.0/8

Not a good example.


This particular /8 allocation is described by IANA as "007/8   Apr 
95   IANA - Reserved" 
in  http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space while a whois query 
to the ARIN database reveals:

$ whois 7.0.0.0

OrgName:    DoD Network Information Center
OrgID:      DNIC
Address:    3990 E. Broad Street
City:       Columbus
StateProv:  OH
PostalCode: 43218
Country:    US

NetRange:   7.0.0.0 - 7.255.255.255
CIDR:       7.0.0.0/8
NetName:    DISANET7
NetHandle:  NET-7-0-0-0-1
Parent:
NetType:    Direct Allocation
Comment:    Defense Information Systems Agency
Comment:    DISA /D3
Comment:    11440 Isaac Newton Square
Comment:    Reston, VA 22090-5087 US
RegDate:    1997-11-24
Updated:    1998-09-26

RTechHandle: MIL-HSTMST-ARIN
RTechName:   Network DoD
RTechPhone:  +1-800-365-3642
RTechEmail:  HOSTMASTER () nic mil

OrgTechHandle: MIL-HSTMST-ARIN
OrgTechName:   Network DoD
OrgTechPhone:  +1-800-365-3642
OrgTechEmail:  HOSTMASTER () nic mil

# ARIN WHOIS database, last updated 2005-11-12 19:10
# Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's WHOIS database.


So in this case who is telling the truth? IANA or ARIN? Is this, as ARIN 
data is claiming, an address block that is currently allocated to the US 
Dept of Defense via a "direct allocation" (by IANA presumably, but 
unspecified in any case), or is this, as IANA data is claiming, an address 
block that is currently in the IANA reserved pool and can be allocated to 
an RIR in the future. Go figure.


> Would we want to change whois output to include the 'pub/priv' flag?

or "conflicting data" flag?

> or perhaps I completely missed the mark? :)


no comment :-)

    Geoff