nanog mailing list archives
Re: Whois 172/12
From: bmanning () vacation karoshi com
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 12:47:19 +0000
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 06:36:12AM -0600, Robert Bonomi wrote:
From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi.com () nanog org Sun Jan 15 02:02:00 2012 Subject: Re: Whois 172/12 From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patrick () ianai net> Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 02:58:11 -0500 To: NANOG list <nanog () nanog org> Read RFC1918. Likely a machine on his local network (i.e. behind the same NAT box) is hitting him.Patrick, I'v read RFC-1918. I cannot find *any* reference to 172.0/12, as the OP was asking about. 172.16/12, yes. but not 172.0/12. Can you please clarify your advice? ZZ
so as a stylistic point, 172/12 is supposed to equal 172.0.0.0/12? if memory serves, back in the day, there were records of allocations in this space, pre-ARIN. When RFC 1918 was settled on, there were some folks blocking 172.0.0.0/8 so there was talk of relocating those folks into other space. /bill
Current thread:
- Re: Whois 172/12, (continued)
- Re: Whois 172/12 Ted Fischer (Jan 15)
- Re: Whois 172/12 Jeroen Massar (Jan 15)
- Re: Whois 172/12 Jimmy Hess (Jan 15)
- RE: Whois 172/12 Keith Medcalf (Jan 15)
- Re: Whois 172/12 Justin M. Streiner (Jan 15)
- Re: Whois 172/12 Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jan 15)
- RE: Whois 172/12 Network IP Dog (Jan 15)
- Re: Whois 172/12 Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jan 15)
- Re: Whois 172/12 Tom Hill (Jan 19)
- Re: Whois 172/12 Robert Bonomi (Jan 15)
- Re: Whois 172/12 bmanning (Jan 15)
- Re: Whois 172/12 Jon Lewis (Jan 15)
- Re: Whois 172/12 Jay Moran (Jan 15)
- Re: Whois 172/12 Patrick W. Gilmore (Jan 15)
- Message not available
- Re: Whois 172/12 Alex Ryu (Jan 15)