RE: [address-policy-wg] "Dirty" recycled network assigned

["Mark McFadden" mcfadden@localhost]

>>An "interesting" (in sort of the way the Ebola virus is "interesting")
>>problem that is going to become much more common as we start reallocating
>>previously allocated or otherwise flagged blocks.  Leo Vegoda has done a
>>couple of presentations on this.

A link or two to those would be useful.  TIA.

>>Just imagine the fun folks who are going to get prefixes out of 1.0.0.0/8
>>are going to have.

It's not just those /8's that will be fun.  As people try to scavenge from
legacy, pre-RIR space there will be all sorts of pressure to recycle from
blocks that aren't currently routable.  For those people who believe that
there is an enormous amount of reclaimable (is that a word?) space in the 
pre-RIR assignments, just imagine how much of that space has been used
twice, thrice or more?  Who, for instance, is the legitimate holder in 
those cases?  Who convinces transit providers to change filters?

I know that the RIRs are in no position to guarantee routability or
"cleanliness" of a prefix.  My point is simply that the pressure to reclaim
"elderly" prefixes is going to be balanced against the practical problems
of multiple uses, RBLs/DUNs, and routability.  That problem is just as
"interesting" as the 1.0.0.0/8 problems.

p.s. I'm thinking that the solution to the Ebola virus will come first.

Mark McFadden