nanog mailing list archives
Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations
From: "Craig A. Huegen" <c-huegen () quad quadrunner com>
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 00:37:46 -0800 (PST)
On Thu, 1 Feb 1996, Jon Zeeff wrote:
Another factoid to consider - I know of a company that has a Class C that they don't use. To my knowledge, nobody has ever even asked that they give it up. Some automated email process could do this without much effort.Well, almost. The IPGR robot is, in fact, doing just that.Based on never having received such an email and knowing of several others who haven't either, I disagree.
Ah, but yes it is... The other day, I received the following message
below asking us if we were still using the network provided to us. Since
we are using it, we politely replied; I'm sure many more people than I
were contacted for older networks.
/cah
----
Craig A. Huegen <chuegen () pyramid com> Phone: (408) 428-8404
Communications Engineer Fax: (408) 428-8513
Electronic Data Systems / Pyramid Technology Corporation
Mail Stop SJ1-1-107, 3860 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95134
--- Begin enclosed mail ---
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 11:46:37 -0800
From: ipgr () ISI EDU
To: chuegen () pyramid com, ipgr () ISI EDU
Subject: Network Number Usage Survey-- 192.107.50.0
Hi,
We have been asked by members of the PIER Working Group of the IETF,
with the approval of the IANA and Internic, to conduct a survey of a
section of the IPv4 address space.
Your address appeared in the InterNIC database as the likely person to
ask about the following set of network numbers:
Pyramid Technology Corporation (NET-RELIANT-HV)
Network number: 192.107.50.0
If you are not the correct contact, please forward this message to
the right person if you can. If you are, we would like to know:
Is your organization still using this address space?
If you are not using it-- would you be willing to return this
address to the IANA for reallocation?
Your answers are important in planning future allocation of the IP
address space. Thank you for your time.
--- End Mail ---
Current thread:
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations, (continued)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Michael Dillon (Feb 02)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Iljitsch van Beijnum (Feb 02)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Curtis Villamizar (Feb 02)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations bmanning (Feb 02)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Curtis Villamizar (Feb 02)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Edward Henigin (Feb 14)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations mike (Feb 16)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Geoff Huston (Feb 01)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Howard Berkowitz (Feb 02)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations David Miller (Feb 02)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Craig A. Huegen (Feb 02)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Ed Morin (Feb 01)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Bill Manning (Feb 01)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations George Herbert (Feb 01)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Andrew Partan (Feb 01)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations George Herbert (Feb 01)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations George Herbert (Feb 01)
- Re: Policy Statement on Address Space Allocations Curtis Villamizar (Feb 01)
