Re: DoD IP Space

[Cynthia Revström via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

I believe the DoD space might be a bit of a difficult one, because (correct
me if I am wrong here) due to it being so massive and unused for so long,
certain large corporations that have run out of RFC1918, etc. space
have started using it internally.

So my take on it is, don't consider it as a bogon from your upstreams, but
maybe have some questions if your downstream is attempting to announce it
as they are somewhat unlikely to be the DoD.
But if you do this, make sure you keep track of where you might have put
policies like this in, in case the DoD sells some the space or whatever in
the future.

-Cynthia


On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 2:39 PM John Curran <jcurran () istaff org> wrote:

> Tom –
>
> Most definitely: lack of routing history is not at all a reliable
> indicator of the potential for valid routing of a given IPv4 block in the
> future, so best practice suggest that allocated address space should not be
> blocked by others without specific cause.
>
> Doing otherwise opens one up to unexpected surprises when issued space
> suddenly becomes more active in routing and is yet is inexplicably
> unreachable for some destinations.
>
> /John
>
> On Nov 5, 2019, at 10:38 AM, Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc> wrote:
>
>
> Using the generally accepted definition of a bogon ( RFC 1918 / 5735 /
> 6598 + netblock not allocated by an RiR ), 22/8 is not a bogon and
> shouldn't be treated as one.
>
> The DoD does not announce it to the DFZ, as is their choice, but nothing
> says they may not change that position tomorrow. There are plenty of
> subnets out there that are properly allocated by an RiR, but the assignees
> do not send them to the DFZ because of $reasons.
>
> In my opinion, creating bogon lists that include allocated but not
> advertised prefixes is poor practice that is likely to end up biting an
> operator at one point or another.
>
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 9:45 AM Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera () gmail com>
> wrote:
>
> > Peace,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 5, 2019, 4:55 PM David Conrad <drc () virtualized org> wrote:
> > > On Nov 4, 2019, at 10:56 PM, Grant Taylor via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
> > wrote:
> > > > This thread got me to wondering, is there any
> > > > legitimate reason to see 22/8 on the public
> > > > Internet?  Or would it be okay to treat 22/8
> > > > like a Bogon and drop it at the network edge?
> > >
> > > Given the transfer market for IPv4 addresses,
> > > the spot price for IPv4 addresses, and the need
> > > of even governments to find “free” (as in
> > > unconstrained) money, I’d think treating any
> > > legacy /8 as a bogon would not be prudent.
> >
> > It has been said before in this thread that the DoD actively uses this
> > network internally.  I believe if the DoD were to cut costs, they
> > would be able to do it much more effectively in many other areas, and
> > their IPv4 networks would be about the last thing they would think of
> > (along with switching off ACs Bernard Ebbers-style).  With that in
> > mind, treating the DoD networks as bogons now makes total sense to me.
> >
> > --
> > Töma