[148420] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Whois 172/12
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com)
Sun Jan 15 07:55:55 2012
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 12:47:19 +0000
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
To: Robert Bonomi <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com>
In-Reply-To: <201201151236.q0FCaCSF047779@mail.r-bonomi.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 06:36:12AM -0600, Robert Bonomi wrote:
> > From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi.com@nanog.org Sun Jan 15 02:02:00 2012
> > Subject: Re: Whois 172/12
> > From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick@ianai.net>
> > Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 02:58:11 -0500
> > To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
> >
> > Read RFC1918.
> >
> > Likely a machine on his local network (i.e. behind the same NAT box) is hitting him.
>
>
> Patrick,
> I'v read RFC-1918. I cannot find *any* reference to 172.0/12, as the OP
> was asking about. 172.16/12, yes. but not 172.0/12. Can you please clarify
> your advice?
>
> ZZ
so as a stylistic point, 172/12 is supposed to equal 172.0.0.0/12?
if memory serves, back in the day, there were records of allocations in this space,
pre-ARIN. When RFC 1918 was settled on, there were some folks blocking 172.0.0.0/8
so there was talk of relocating those folks into other space.
/bill
