nanog mailing list archives
Re: 44/8
From: Ca By <cb.list6 () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 16:12:17 -0700
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 4:02 PM Jerry Cloe <jerry () jtcloe net> wrote:
There's already widespread use (abuse ?) of DOD /8's. T-Mobile commonly assigns 26/8 space (and others) to customers and nat's it.
My understanding is that is not currently commonly the case https://www.worldipv6launch.org/apps/ipv6week/measurement/images/graphs/T-MobileUSA.png
-----Original message----- *From:* Michel Py <michel.py () tsisemi com> *Sent:* Mon 07-22-2019 05:36 pm *Subject:* RE: 44/8 *To:* William Herrin <bill () herrin us>; *CC:* North American Network Operatorsā Group <nanog () nanog org>; As an extension of RFC1918, it would have solved the questionable and nevertheless widespread squatting of 30/8 and other un-announced DoD blocks because 10/8 is not big enough for some folks. Michel
Current thread:
- RE: 44/8, (continued)
- Ancient history (was Re: 44/8) David Conrad (Jul 24)
- Re: Ancient history (was Re: 44/8) William Herrin (Jul 24)
- RE: 44/8 Michel Py (Jul 22)
- RE: 44/8 Jerry Cloe (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Ca By (Jul 22)
- RE: 44/8 Michel Py (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Hansen, Christoffer (Jul 24)
- Re: 44/8 Owen DeLong (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Matt Hoppes (Jul 22)
- RE: 44/8 Naslund, Steve (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Stephen Satchell (Jul 22)
- Re: 44/8 Owen DeLong (Jul 22)
- 240/4 (Re: 44/8) Mikael Abrahamsson (Jul 22)
- Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8) Owen DeLong (Jul 22)
- Re: 240/4 (Re: 44/8) George Herbert (Jul 22)