[136212] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Last of ipv4 /8's allocated
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Carpenter)
Tue Feb 1 18:45:11 2011
X-RC-FROM: <rcarpen@network1.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 18:39:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Randy Carpenter <rcarpen@network1.net>
To: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
In-Reply-To: <230156B7-B9F7-4A24-A3A6-E981110F68AC@muada.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
----- Original Message -----
> On 1 feb 2011, at 23:33, Randy Carpenter wrote:
>
> > That's how I would do it. With the exception of LACNIC, each one
> > neighbors a block that is already allocated to that RIR.
>
> But if they wanted to do that, why give 106/8 to APNIC?
I assume you mean 102/8, and because it is right next to 101/8, which they already have. Doesn't make a nice /7, but there are no other unallocated blocks that are next to any APNIC blocks.
> My suspicion is that IANA is playing a game of battleship with the
> RIRs and thursday we'll see who's won. Colored in for your
> convenience:
>
> http://www.bgpexpert.com/ianaglobalpool.php
Doesn't really matter who gets what, because no one is going to route anything larger than a /8 anyway, particularly the RIR allocations. Just kinda fun to think about :-)
-Randy
