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/db-wg@ripe.net/

[db-wg] 57.224.0.0/11

Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] 57.224.0.0/11
Next message (by thread): [db-wg] 57.224.0.0/11

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Ronald F. Guilmette rfg at tristatelogic.com
Tue Sep 22 04:13:27 CEST 2020

In message <5f5f77f8-c211-7c45-e8aa-b873fdbb0ac2 at foobar.org>, 
Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:

>Ronald F. Guilmette via db-wg wrote on 21/09/2020 09:47:
>> inetnum:        57.224.0.0 - 57.255.255.255
>
>Wasn't the whole of 57.0.0.0/8 registered to SITA?
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IPv4_address_blocks
>
>57.0.0.0/8 	RIPE NCC 	1995-05 		Formerly SITA.

Thank you Nick.  I guess that (mostly) clears up the mystery.

I'm not sure that the created date should be altered however when an
existing block, legacy or otherwise, is simply shrunk, as appears
to have happaned in this case.

Doing that could cause confusion.

Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] 57.224.0.0/11
Next message (by thread): [db-wg] 57.224.0.0/11

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ db-wg Archives ]