[140868] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Cameron Byrne)
Tue May 24 00:49:42 2011
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=tRT3j71Ty6YVp3c9DvXhS3CnjSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 21:48:53 -0700
From: Cameron Byrne <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Jimmy Hess <mysidia@gmail.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On May 23, 2011 9:37 PM, "Jimmy Hess" <mysidia@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore <patrick@ianai.net>
wrote:
> > If they do, any Rogers customer who wants to talk to it is screwed.
Whether they have a 7 addy or not, Rogers' routers will not let the packet
leave Rogers' borders.
>
> That could depend on whether Rogers' border routers are adequately
configured
> 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
fire.
>
>
> 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.
>
Or, ipv6 gets deployed and supported since it will be the effective network
of networks
Cb
> > TTFN,
> > patrick
> --
> -JH
>
