nanog mailing list archives
Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space
From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 22:27:10 -0700
On May 25, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Christopher Pilkington wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Michael Dillon <wavetossed () googlemail com> wrote:So we should CONDONE such borrowing and recommend a couple of /8s to use in North America. Perhaps one could be DOD for those operators that do not carry any DOD traffic and one could be that /8 from Softbank Japan, 126/8 if I recall it correctly. People who carry DOD traffic could borrow the APNIC block.I recommend 44/8. Does it make sense that ham radio operators have routable IP address space any longer? (Seems to be still advertised, though.) -cjp (n2mcs)
Why shouldn't they? Owen DeLong KB6MER
Current thread:
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space, (continued)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space Christopher Pilkington (May 25)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space Robert Bonomi (May 25)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space mikea (May 25)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space bmanning (May 25)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space Christopher Pilkington (May 25)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space Joe Hamelin (May 25)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space Owen DeLong (May 25)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space Matthew Kaufman (May 25)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space Owen DeLong (May 26)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space Lyndon Nerenberg (May 25)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space Owen DeLong (May 25)
- Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space David Conrad (May 25)