[address-policy-wg] Re: [ppml] Re : on PPML? - was Re: How to get ...
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re : [ppml] on PPML? - was Re: How to get ...
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The Choice: IPv4 Exhaustion or Transition to IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
David Conrad
drc at virtualized.org
Fri Jun 22 19:41:52 CEST 2007
Iwu, > Have you also come across the following address waist? I haven't seen > you guys making any noise about them! > > 014/8 Jun 91 IANA - Public Data Network > ---- (a whole /8 for an organisation of less than 20 people?) Actually, the PDN /8 was allocated for integrating X.25 networks into the Internet. Individual /32s were assigned to X.25 endpoints run by different companies, so representing 14/8 as "a whole /8 for an organization of less than 20 people" is not accurate. And besides, Leo Vegoda has been very active in recovering the /32s so we can return 14/8 to the free pool. There used to be over 200 assignments in that /8. There are lots of better examples in the "legacy /8" space, however I'm not sure "historical reasons" is a good rationale for current policy in an entirely different address space. > inet6num: 2001:07F8::/29 > inet6num: 2001:07FD::/32 > netname: K-rootserver-net-20030829 > descr: This assignment given to k-root.server.net > descr: maintained by the RIPE NCC > > --- (just for the Kroot server Infratsructure ????? is this an LIR) Because root name server addresses must be encoded into configurations of all caching servers on the Internet, I believe that they are very special and should be treated specially. Rgds, -drc
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Re : [ppml] on PPML? - was Re: How to get ...
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The Choice: IPv4 Exhaustion or Transition to IPv6
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]