[140866] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jimmy Hess)
Tue May 24 00:36:31 2011
In-Reply-To: <47B9E64B-8FF1-46BE-8E45-DD3CB7C3055B@ianai.net>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 23:36:24 -0500
From: Jimmy Hess <mysidia@gmail.com>
To: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick@ianai.net> wr=
ote:
> If they do, any Rogers customer who wants to talk to it is screwed. =A0Wh=
ether they have a 7 addy or not, Rogers' routers will not let the packet le=
ave Rogers' borders.
That could depend on whether Rogers' border routers are adequately configur=
ed
to block/filter the announcement, and whether whatever the DoD chose to
announce was a longer prefix than what Rogers' equipment had
routes/controls for.
In theory; there exists a possibility that the DoD could announce a
/24 of something
Rogers' was internally routing as a /16, then if unfiltered the DoD
announce could win,
causing internal (self-inflicted) issues for Rogers.
The DoD could also eventually use the 7 range for something, resulting
in complaints to Rogers
from users who seem unable to reach (some web site placed in 7/8).
Unofficial use of other organization's IP address space is playing with fir=
e.
It may mark the symbolic start of a new IPv4, where eventually
many /8s will have tons of unofficial claimaints, and whoever
threatens more, pays the major providers more, or has more lawyers
(take your pick), gets their announcement more widely propagated.
Sometimes if enough players start playing with fire, a really bad,
uncontrollable inferno eventually gets ignited.
> TTFN,
> patrick
--
-JH
