North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: follow-up IANA-RESERVED IRR
- From: John M. Brown
- Date: Wed Sep 04 15:15:46 2002
I'm concerned with having "to much data" in the system. This invites
mistakes, potential abuse and other problems.
By having only:
RESERVED or ALLOCATED
and having that publishd by IANA, we reduce the potential of
mistakes affecting "real users".
If the RIR's are going to provide more data, then they need to
upgrade their business and expense models to support live people
7x24x365 so that mistakes are fixed QUICKLY.
Just my own personal $.02 on the topic.
I would suggest, crawl, walk, run with this idea.
Lets first get IANA up and going, then see how well that works
and move forward if it makes sense and the appropriate protections
can be in place.
speaking for himself only
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 02:34:27PM -0400, Sean Donelan wrote:
> Cool, maybe we're making progress. The last N times this has come up,
> the biggest X the big IP backbones showed a distinct lack of interest
> or in one case extreme hostility to the idea.
> I've suggested an AS-NULL(AS0) or AS-RESERVED machine parsable macros for
> unassigned prefixes which should have no routes (including more
> specific routes) which could be automatically included in router
> configurations. Or at least queried when debuging stuff.
> Every network block should be assigned an "responsible party." I'm
> avoiding using the word "owner". By default IANA would be the responsible
> party for all "RESERVED" address space, and listed as such in IANA, RIR,
> or where ever we decied to keep the information. As address space is
> assigned, allocated, delegated, etc, the reserved space would be split so
> you can tell the difference between address squaters and valid
> RESERVED (Not released by IANA for use)
> ALLOCATED (Available for network allocations, but not in use)
> ASSIGNED (Assigned for use by an entity, may be routed now or soon)
> CONNECTED (Connected to the global Internet)
> MULTICAST (Not a valid source address)
> SPECIAL (Matians, we don't know where they come from, drop on sight)
> EXPERIMENTAL (Consenting parties only)
> PRIVATE (Local use only)
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2002, John M. Brown wrote:
> > A good number of private replies from people and their "day job"
> > addresses. Most have asked for prior permission before
> > quoting them.
> > In general, three default-free global backbone providers
> > stated they would love to see something like this available,
> > from IANA is the prefered answer.
> > Some would like to see more than just IANA address information,
> > and other contend that would be a can of worms and opens some
> > risk issues.
> > It seems that there is general support and that people would use
> > such a service if available and reliable.
> > If you have comments on this, and can post publicly, please
> > do.
> > Thank you
> > john brown
> > speaking for himself