[147598] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: De-bogon not possible via arin policy.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Justin M. Streiner)
Thu Dec 15 09:08:50 2011
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 09:07:50 -0500 (EST)
From: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner@cluebyfour.org>
To: "nanog@nanog.org list" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <47067B6B-1026-42CF-A133-A18A70553731@virtualized.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, David Conrad wrote:
> I'm confused. When justifying 'need' in an address allocation request,
> what difference does it make whether an address in use was allocated by
> an RIR or was squatted upon? Last I heard, renumbering out of (say) RFC
> 1918 space into public space was still a justification for address
> space. Has this changed?
I tend to think of squatting in the sense of using a resource (could be an
IP address block, could be an empty house, could be just about anything)
that the person who is using it does not have permission to do so. I
would think that definition holds up even when taking into account that
people do not own their IP address allocations. An RIR or ISP assigning
address space to a particular entity would establish a legitimate (but
not irrevocable) claim to use a block of address space.
Squatting is maybe one notch above hijacking in this sense.
jms
