North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Re: 41/8 announcement
- From: Patrick W. Gilmore
- Date: Wed May 24 09:16:33 2006
On May 24, 2006, at 4:37 AM, Richard Mikisa wrote:
One of the points of NAT is to make renumbering easy. Silly them.
>Turns out the folks at fastweb (Italy) NAT there adsl clients but
Yes: you lose, sorry. :-)
>instead of using the rfc1918 space like most people, they use
>global /8s. Well 41/8 is one of there NATted allocations for
>amount of emails will get them to respond, calling isn't any better
>get only Italian speaking people at the other end. Any ideas out
Many of their networking people are less than clueful, and I fear that
they are not going to renumber a whole city just to let their
communicate with a few African networks...
I have a rule: Your network, your rules. If they want to be
disconnected from Africa, you can't stop them. And they are not
"hijacking" the /8, it is not announced on the 'Net. This is
identical to a null route inside their ASN. I would never dream of
telling them they cannot decide which netblocks should be routeable
inside their own ASN.
Fortunately, I have another rule: My network, my rules. If someone
can find the real addresses for FastWeb uses for the NAT pool and
post it here (and other *NOG lists), networks can ensure that
FastWeb's end users will be unable to communicate with a lot more
than "a few African networks". I think the show of solidarity would
be good for the 'Net.