[140946] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Rogers Canada using 7.0.0.0/8 for internal address space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Pilkington)
Wed May 25 17:24:39 2011
In-Reply-To: <20110525202452.GA24806@vacation.karoshi.com.>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2011 17:23:43 -0400
From: Christopher Pilkington <cjp@0x1.net>
To: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 4:24 PM, <bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com> wrote:
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0NOTE WELL - Just because -you- (for values of you) see no =
value in
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0space assigned, does NOT give you the right to hijack said=
space
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0for your own purposes. =A0 Nor does it look well =A0for yo=
u to advocate
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0hijacking someone elses space....
Indeed, arbitrary is arbitrary, be it ham radio operators or the DoD.
I was trolling hams on the list there, my apologies. FWIW, my box
44.68.16.20 hasn't been up in well over a decade. Would have been
nice if that packet radio masses kept up with (or ahead of) the
technology of the times. Our network went to 9600 baud user ports,
then vanished.
-cjp (n2mcs)
