nanog mailing list archives
Re: DoD IP Space
From: Töma Gavrichenkov <ximaera () gmail com>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 17:43:20 +0300
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
Current thread:
- Re: DoD IP Space, (continued)
- Re: DoD IP Space Jason Biel (Nov 04)
- Re: DoD IP Space Chris Knipe (Nov 04)
- Re: DoD IP Space Robert McKay (Nov 04)
- Re: DoD IP Space Tom Beecher (Nov 04)
- Re: DoD IP Space Jason Biel (Nov 04)
- Re: DoD IP Space David Guo via NANOG (Nov 04)
- Re: DoD IP Space Joe Provo (Nov 04)
- Re: DoD IP Space Chris Knipe (Nov 04)
- Re: DoD IP Space Grant Taylor via NANOG (Nov 04)
- Moving DoD traffic... Richard (Nov 04)
- Re: DoD IP Space David Conrad (Nov 05)
- Re: DoD IP Space Töma Gavrichenkov (Nov 05)
- Re: DoD IP Space Tom Beecher (Nov 05)