Re: Utilizing USG networks for internal purposes (Re: route: 0.0.0.0/32 in LEVEL3 IRR)

[Dave Taht <dave.taht () gmail com>]

Excellent summary of the USG position as of 2019. It is, um, nearly 5
years later, has any of these stuff evolved?

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 9:58 PM John Curran <jcurran () arin net> wrote:
> On Jan 31, 2024, at 12:48 AM, Rubens Kuhl <rubensk () gmail com> wrote:
>
> DoD's /8s are usually squatted by networks that run out of private IPv4 space.
> Even though it is very risky to steal resources from an organization
> that can deploy a black helicopter or a nuclear warhead over you, for
> some reason like it not appearing in the DFZ people seem to like it.
>
>
> Folks -
>
> A network that wants to be creative and utilize an address block that’s assigned to others
> for their own internal purposes runs two distinct risks:
>
> 1. An address block that’s not utilized today may easily become publicly routed tomorrow
>     (either by the original address holder or by their assignee/successor) and it is not possible
>     to reliably predict whether your customers will need access to the resources that end up
>     on that address space.
>
> 2. If you should leak routes publicly for another's address space, there are organizations that
>     will object – and in the case US government networks, this can include some uncomfortable
>     conversations.  [1]
>
> None of this suggests that one cannot configure their routers any way that they wish – just that
> it’d be best if done with appropriate care and an upfront understanding of the risks involved.
>
> Thanks!
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>
> [1] https://pc.nanog.org/static/published/meetings/NANOG77/2108/20191028_Elverson_Your_As_Is_v1.pdf
>      pg 4.


-- 
40 years of net history, a couple songs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9RGX6QFm5E
Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos