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/[email protected]/
[db-wg] Removal of bogon route objects
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Removal of bogon route objects
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Removal of bogon route objects
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Ronald F. Guilmette
rfg at tristatelogic.com
Fri Jun 11 22:36:38 CEST 2021
In message <28bdc761-e318-2402-c90f-1881c1d0310b at geier.ne.tz>, Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz> wrote: >Hi Ronald, > >On 11/06/2021 11:24, Ronald F. Guilmette via db-wg wrote: >> iana|ZZ|ipv4|192.175.48.0|256|20150501|reserved|ietf|iana >> >> In reality the block isn't reserved and it doesn't belong to IANA. >> It's a regular old (assigned) ARIN block. > >I think it once *was* regular. >and then: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7534#section-7.2.3 > >I think AS112 has a little bit a "special" history. >Route Objects for 192.175.48.0 and AS112 are a good thing, I hope not >only in ARIN IRR. I made no judgement on either the block or the relevant ASN. The block has an ARIN WHOIS record. It should be listed in the NRO file in a manner consistant with that. Code hates exceptions, and so do I. Regards, rfg
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] Removal of bogon route objects
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Removal of bogon route objects
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]