This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/anti-abuse-wg@ripe.net/
[anti-abuse-wg] weird ERX networks ?
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] weird ERX networks ?
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] weird ERX networks ?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Thor Kottelin
thor.kottelin at turvasana.com
Mon Mar 26 11:59:03 CEST 2012
> -----Original Message----- > From: anti-abuse-wg-bounces at ripe.net [mailto:anti-abuse-wg- > bounces at ripe.net] On Behalf Of Frank Gadegast > Sent: Monday, March 26, 2012 12:44 PM > To: anti-abuse-wg at ripe.net > Should not any resource belong to one of the RIRs (even if its PI > space) ? In the interest of picking nits: a number of /8 prefixes were allocated to non-RIR entities between 1991 and 1998 (look for 'LEGACY' status at http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.xml). The network you mentioned is not in any of those ranges though. -- Thor Kottelin http://www.anta.net/
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] weird ERX networks ?
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] weird ERX networks ?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]