nanog mailing list archives
Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc
From: bmanning () ISI EDU
Date: Wed, 17 May 1995 05:55:55 -0700 (PDT)
There is an easy solution -- do not allocate less than /16s. This would relieve InterNIC from caring about IN-ADDRs (and will do good things for routing, too). --vadim All ISPs receiving /16 prefix blocks from the InterNIC will be responsible for maintaining all IN-ADDR.ARPA domain records for their respective customers. The InterNIC Registry will only be responsible for the maintenance of IN-ADDR.ARPA domain records for those CIDR blocks with prefixes longer than /16 issued directly from the InterNIC.
Of course that violates the NIC charter as being the NIC of first and last resort. -- --bill
Current thread:
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Vince Fuller (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Mark Kosters (May 16)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Draft internic ip allocation doc Mark Kosters (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc bmanning (May 16)
- Message not available
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Randy Bush (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Paul Holbrook (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Vince Fuller (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc bmanning (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Louis A. Mamakos (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Vadim Antonov (May 16)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc bmanning (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc David R Conrad (May 18)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Mark Kosters (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc bmanning (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Juha Heinanen (May 18)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Louis A. Mamakos (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc Louis A. Mamakos (May 17)
- Re: Draft internic ip allocation doc bmanning (May 17)