mailing list archives
Re: heads up on 80/8 [actually operational, so don't read this!!!]
From: Philip Smith <pfs () cisco com>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 22:14:07 +1000
TBH, a new /7 or /8, whatever, going in to production anywhere on the
planet should be announced to the regional operators lists (NANOG, APOPS,
EOF and AfNOG). Hopefully the registry folks can add that little chore to
the long list of other things they have to think of...
Or maybe IANA could widen the announcement next time? This was the original
>From: "John Crain" <crain () icann org>
>To: <routing-wg () ripe net>, <lir () ripe net>
>Subject: 80/8 and 81/8 allocated to the RIPE NCC
>Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 13:47:21 -0700
Message-ID: <EDEBKALLMADOHECDLBLIOEBBCAAA.crain () icann org>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
>This is just a quick heads up, my apologies if you recieve duplicate copies.
>IANA has recently allocated the following address ranges to the RIPE NCC
>Regional Internet Registry.
>126.96.36.199 - 188.8.131.52
>These will start to be allocated to ISPs shortly.
>You may wish to adjust any filters you have in place accordingly.
At 17:42 17/05/2001 +1000, Bruce Campbell wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2001, John M . Brown wrote:
> While I could agree that its not a problem till someone tries to use it,
> I point out that ARIN does make an announcement when they are going
> to start issuing from a new IANA block.
And I'll counter-point out that ARIN is notifying relevant groups in its
Region. Why would you expect the RIPE NCC to formally notify a group
(nanog) that is not in its region (Europe) ?
To keep this operational, this lists the various /8s and who is
(nominally) in charge of 'em; it may be of interest to people who haven't
reviewed their filters in ages:
> We, The Net Operators, should have this information so that we can update
> our filters, should we see fit to, and thus cause as little negative impact
> as possible.
s/The Net/The North American Network/
s/possible/possible to traffic that transists North America/
currently not in North America, and certainly speaking for myself ;)
Re: heads up on 80/8 [actually operational, so don't read this!!!] Sean M. Doran (May 17)
Message not availableRe: heads up on 80/8 [actually operational, so don't read this!!!] Philip Smith (May 17)
Re: heads up on 80/8 [actually operational, so don't read this!!!] John Crain (May 17)
Re: heads up on 80/8 [actually operational, so don't read this!!!] Travis Pugh (May 17)
- Re: heads up on 80/8 [actually operational, so don't read this!!!], (continued)