Sent from my iPad
On May 23, 2011, at 11:32, David Conrad <d...@virtualized.org> wrote: > On May 23, 2011, at 8:28 AM, Mark Farina wrote: >> Is the DoD releasing this range to Rogers? > > Unlikely, although it might be an interesting case of testing ARIN's transfer > policy if it was the case :-). > >> Or has Rogers squatted on this space due to exhaustion of their 10/8 use? > > Probably. I've heard other large providers having similar issues (resulting > in several attempts to designate more RFC 1918, all of which were all shot > down). > Really? All of them? Are you sure about that? I believe there is a policy proposal in the ARIN region which, I have it on good authority is still active. True, it doesn't technically designate more RFC-1918, but, it does create a /10 of space for shared use for the purpose of LSN intermediate space or other carrier-level private network usage. >> We've seen other vendors and ISP squat on previously unused ranges (the 1/8 >> or 5/8s). > > Yes, however at the time those ISPs squatted on those addresses (and others), > they had not yet been allocated by IANA pretty much guaranteeing there would > be collisions when the IPv4 free pool was exhausted. In this case, the block > has been allocated yet doesn't appear to be in the routing system and I'm not > sure it ever has been (at least authorized to be). I'm guessing Rogers is > making the assumption that the chances are probably small that one of their > customers will need to communicate with a non-announced US DoD network. I > suspect they aren't the first to make this assumption. > More likely they are making the assumption that their private internal use of the address space won't conflict with DoD's (apparently) private internal use of the address space. Owen
