nanog mailing list archives
Re: 39/8 ?
From: bmanning () karoshi com
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2002 05:20:26 +0000 (UCT)
net 39 was used to validate the CIDR-style of addressing. I was instructed to host the nameservers for the prefix and there was an experiment to announce various fragments of the space. You can find the experiment and its results in the RFC archives. Since that experiment, ARIN came into being as has ICANN. They have apparently seen fit to move the prefix back into reserved space, but have not "cleaned" up the DNS delegation. You may think of this announcemnt as a "network appendix", of little intrinsic value. You may also find that its a reasonable way to validate your filters... -- bill (still waiting for the other shoe to drop...)
In a message written on Wed, Jun 19, 2002 at 12:33:36AM +0100, Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:I cant find AS4554 either and the rDNS doesnt exist in in-addr.arpaI believe this is EP.Net LLC, a Bill Manning company.[whois.radb.net] route: 39.0.0.0/8 descr: Exchange Point Networks PO 12317 Marina del Rey, CA. 90295 US origin: AS4554 mnt-by: MNT-EPNET changed: bmanning () karoshi com 20020401 source: ARINWhich seems to match who reserved the network. :-) Why Bill / EP.Net is experimenting / leaking 39/8 is beyond me, but at least from where I sit it's as legitimate as any other announcement. -- Leo Bicknell - bicknell () ufp org - CCIE 3440 PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request () tmbg org, www.tmbg.org
Current thread:
- 39/8 ? Stephen J. Wilcox (Jun 18)
- Re: 39/8 ? Stephen J. Wilcox (Jun 19)
- Message not available
- Re: 39/8 ? Andre Chapuis (Jun 19)
- Re: 39/8 ? John Palmer (Jun 19)
- Re: 39/8 ? Stephen Griffin (Jun 19)
- Re: 39/8 ? Andre Chapuis (Jun 19)
- Re: 39/8 ? Leo Bicknell (Jun 19)
- Re: 39/8 ? bmanning (Jun 19)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: 39/8 ? Kris Foster (Jun 19)