Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: NANOG: users

shared address space... a reality!

 

 

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All NANOG users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


christopher.morrow at gmail

Mar 13, 2012, 11:22 PM

Post #1 of 40 (2464 views)
Permalink
shared address space... a reality!

NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
OriginAS:
NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED


joelja at bogus

Mar 13, 2012, 11:29 PM

Post #2 of 40 (2431 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On 3/13/12 23:22 , Christopher Morrow wrote:
> NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
> CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
> OriginAS:
> NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED

Already updated my martians acl and deployed it internally...


joelja at bogus

Mar 13, 2012, 11:42 PM

Post #3 of 40 (2430 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On 3/13/12 23:29 , Joel jaeggli wrote:
> On 3/13/12 23:22 , Christopher Morrow wrote:
>> NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
>> CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
>> OriginAS:
>> NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED
>
> Already updated my martians acl and deployed it internally...

this also means you should probably filter the 6to4 mapped address range
from 2002:a40::/48 to 2002:a7f:ffff::/48 since those have no chance of
making it home.


leigh.porter at ukbroadband

Mar 13, 2012, 11:44 PM

Post #4 of 40 (2435 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On 14 Mar 2012, at 06:31, "Joel jaeggli" <joelja [at] bogus> wrote:

> On 3/13/12 23:22 , Christopher Morrow wrote:
>> NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
>> CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
>> OriginAS:
>> NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED
>
> Already updated my martians acl and deployed it internally...

There's an app for that!

--
Leigh


______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________


joelja at bogus

Mar 14, 2012, 12:17 AM

Post #5 of 40 (2430 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On 3/14/12 00:06 , Frank Habicht wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 3/14/2012 9:42 AM, Joel jaeggli wrote:
>> On 3/13/12 23:29 , Joel jaeggli wrote:
>>> On 3/13/12 23:22 , Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>>> NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
>>>> CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
>>>> OriginAS:
>>>> NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED
>>>
>>> Already updated my martians acl and deployed it internally...
>>
>> this also means you should probably filter the 6to4 mapped address range
>> from 2002:a40::/48 to 2002:a7f:ffff::/48 since those have no chance of
>> making it home.
>
> is my hex going bad...?

no mine is, or I'm lapsing into 10/8

> or should it be 2002:6440:: ......

2002:6440::/48 to 2002:647f:ffff::/48

> is that the funny space for CGN?
>
> Frank
>


mansaxel at besserwisser

Mar 14, 2012, 12:47 AM

Post #6 of 40 (2429 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 02:22:04AM -0400, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
> CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
> OriginAS:
> NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED

GOOD.

Now I can BOTH keep sticking my head in the sand AND get NEW RFC 1918
space to number my devices!

Trailing edge WINS!

Congrats, all you people who joined the ietf mailing list to get your
VOTE through. You can sign off now and continue non-contributing to the
developement of the future.

--
/Måns, pissed off.


ml at kenweb

Mar 14, 2012, 4:54 AM

Post #7 of 40 (2408 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On 3/14/2012 2:22 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
> CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
> OriginAS:
> NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED
>


Did IANA have to justify this space to ARIN or was it just given to them
no questions asked because a draft RFC specified a need for a /10?


morrowc.lists at gmail

Mar 14, 2012, 7:41 AM

Post #8 of 40 (2406 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:54 AM, ML <ml [at] kenweb> wrote:
> On 3/14/2012 2:22 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>
>> NetRange:       100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
>> CIDR:           100.64.0.0/10
>> OriginAS:
>> NetName:        SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED
>>
>
>
> Did IANA have to justify this space to ARIN or was it just given to them no
> questions asked because a draft RFC specified a need for a /10?

see the discussion in PPML/arin-announce... my recollection is
something like this happened (paraphrased for the tl/dr crowd):
1) someone wanted more 1918^H^H^Hshared-transition space
2) a policy proposal came to ARIN's PP meeting
3) the policy proposal ran around for a time making friends
4) the proposal passed and the ARIN BoT essentially got a message from
IANA/IESG saying:
"Hey, before you leap... lookout, perhaps the IETF should weigh in?"
5) an IETF draft was drafted (which later had a baby... so there are 2
versions/parts flying about)
6) the main draft was finalized and sent along to the RFC editor, and
made into a BCP
<http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg09959.html>
7) IANA received this /10 from ARIN

-chris


ndavis at arin

Mar 14, 2012, 10:22 AM

Post #9 of 40 (2389 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

Thanks Chris for the update to the list. One minor clarification for the
community with regards to:

4) the proposal passed and the ARIN BoT essentially got a message from
IANA/IESG saying:
"Hey, before you leap... lookout, perhaps the IETF should weigh in?"


After the ARIN Advisory Council forwarded the policy to the ARIN Board of
Trustees for consideration,
the Trustees directed the President, John Curran, to consult with the IAB
and IESG on the potential
issues of adopting said draft policy prior to taking any further policy
action.

Regards,

Nate Davis
Chief Operating Officer
American Registry for Internet Numbers


owen at delong

Mar 14, 2012, 11:41 AM

Post #10 of 40 (2387 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On Mar 14, 2012, at 7:41 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 7:54 AM, ML <ml [at] kenweb> wrote:
>> On 3/14/2012 2:22 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>>
>>> NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
>>> CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
>>> OriginAS:
>>> NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED
>>>
>>
>>
>> Did IANA have to justify this space to ARIN or was it just given to them no
>> questions asked because a draft RFC specified a need for a /10?
>
> see the discussion in PPML/arin-announce... my recollection is
> something like this happened (paraphrased for the tl/dr crowd):
> 1) someone wanted more 1918^H^H^Hshared-transition space
> 2) a policy proposal came to ARIN's PP meeting
> 3) the policy proposal ran around for a time making friends
> 4) the proposal passed and the ARIN BoT essentially got a message from
> IANA/IESG saying:
> "Hey, before you leap... lookout, perhaps the IETF should weigh in?"

Well, actually, the ARIN board^H^H^H^H^HCEO went to IESG saying
"mother may I" would be a more accurate description of the process.

> 5) an IETF draft was drafted (which later had a baby... so there are 2
> versions/parts flying about)

Actually, draft-weil was floated before the ARIN policy proposal IIRC.
The other draft (draft-bdgks) came after, essentially in response to the
statement by the ARIN board/CEO that getting the policy implemented
would require IESG approval.

> 6) the main draft was finalized and sent along to the RFC editor, and
> made into a BCP
> <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg09959.html>
> 7) IANA received this /10 from ARIN

Otherwise, yeah, I think that about sums it up.

Owen


morrowc.lists at gmail

Mar 14, 2012, 5:54 PM

Post #11 of 40 (2383 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Nate Davis <ndavis [at] arin> wrote:
> Thanks Chris for the update to the list.  One minor clarification for the
> community with regards to:
>
> 4) the proposal passed and the ARIN BoT essentially got a message from
> IANA/IESG saying:
>   "Hey, before you leap... lookout, perhaps the IETF should weigh in?"
>
>
> After the ARIN Advisory Council forwarded the policy to the ARIN Board of
> Trustees for consideration,
> the Trustees directed the President, John Curran, to consult with the IAB
> and IESG on the potential
> issues of adopting said draft policy prior to taking any further policy
> action.

thanks! history is important here.


randy at psg

Mar 14, 2012, 11:59 PM

Post #12 of 40 (2374 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

>> NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
>> CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
> Already updated my martians acl and deployed it internally...

and i have configured two home LANs to use it

randy


cdel at firsthand

Mar 15, 2012, 1:51 AM

Post #13 of 40 (2364 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

;-) So that is what "very rough consensus" looks like operationally!
IESG Note
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg09959.html


Christian
On 15 Mar 2012, at 06:59, Randy Bush wrote:

>>> NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
>>> CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
>> Already updated my martians acl and deployed it internally...
>
> and i have configured two home LANs to use it
>
> randy
>


randy at psg

Mar 15, 2012, 3:18 AM

Post #14 of 40 (2362 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

> ;-) So that is what "very rough consensus" looks like operationally!

seems to be


mohta at necom830

Mar 15, 2012, 6:02 AM

Post #15 of 40 (2352 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

Christian de Larrinaga wrote:

> ;-) So that is what "very rough consensus" looks like operationally!
> IESG Note
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg09959.html

Instead, I wonder whether the last phrases of the note, "the IETF
remain committed to the deployment of IPv6" is the consensus,
however rough, or not.

It might be so, if people silently ignoring IPv6 are not counted.

Masataka Ohta


jerome at ceriz

Mar 15, 2012, 6:26 AM

Post #16 of 40 (2338 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

Le 15/03/12 07:59, Randy Bush a écrit :
> and i have configured two home LANs to use it

Sooooo wrong...

--
Jérôme Nicolle


jcurran at arin

Mar 15, 2012, 8:34 AM

Post #17 of 40 (2337 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On Mar 14, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>
> thanks! history is important here.

Policy proposals for "specialized technical allocations"
are best considered by the IETF. ARIN was aware of the
RFC 2860 (the MOU between ICANN and the IAB) which said
as much, and once we confirmed this understanding with
the IAB, ARIN directed the community to make use of the
IETF process to develop an appropriate RFC for an IANA
assignment.

ARIN was notified by the IANA that the RFC was approved
and was asked if we could assign sufficient resources to
them for this purpose. The ARIN Board approved assigning
back to the IANA a /10 block out of one of the /8's we
received from them in 2010. The IANA registry has been
now updated accordingly: http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.xml#note5

Thanks! (and hope this clarifies things)
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN


morrowc.lists at gmail

Mar 15, 2012, 8:38 AM

Post #18 of 40 (2336 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 11:34 AM, John Curran <jcurran [at] arin> wrote:
> On Mar 14, 2012, at 6:54 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
>>
>> thanks! history is important here.
>

reading this this morning, my comment sounds more flippant than I
meant. I really did mean that getting the details right was important.

> Policy proposals for "specialized technical allocations"
> are best considered by the IETF.  ARIN was aware of the
> RFC 2860 (the MOU between ICANN and the IAB) which said
> as much, and once we confirmed this understanding with
> the IAB, ARIN directed the community to make use of the
> IETF process to develop an appropriate RFC for an IANA
> assignment.
>
> ARIN was notified by the IANA that the RFC was approved
> and was asked if we could assign sufficient resources to
> them for this purpose.  The ARIN Board approved assigning
> back to the IANA a /10 block out of one of the /8's we
> received from them in 2010.  The IANA registry has been
> now updated accordingly: http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.xml#note5
>
> Thanks! (and hope this clarifies things)

does, thanks!

>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> ARIN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


george.herbert at gmail

Mar 15, 2012, 1:35 PM

Post #19 of 40 (2329 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

What, senior network people testing out new test/transitional space at
home before they test it at work is bad?

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 6:26 AM, Jérôme Nicolle <jerome [at] ceriz> wrote:
> Le 15/03/12 07:59, Randy Bush a écrit :
>> and i have configured two home LANs to use it
>
> Sooooo wrong...
>
> --
> Jérôme Nicolle
>



--
-george william herbert
george.herbert [at] gmail


rs at seastrom

Mar 15, 2012, 1:57 PM

Post #20 of 40 (2327 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

More like "wasting no time in fulfilling the prophesy that people will
treat it like just another rfc1918 space and deploy it wherever they want".

not that randy is likely to get bitten because he's not behind a cgn
nor is he planning to be, but still, that took all of what, 72 hours?

-r

George Herbert <george.herbert [at] gmail> writes:

> What, senior network people testing out new test/transitional space at
> home before they test it at work is bad?
>
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 6:26 AM, Jérôme Nicolle <jerome [at] ceriz> wrote:
>> Le 15/03/12 07:59, Randy Bush a écrit :
>>> and i have configured two home LANs to use it
>>
>> Sooooo wrong...
>>
>> --
>> Jérôme Nicolle
>>
>
>
>
> --
> -george william herbert
> george.herbert [at] gmail


Valdis.Kletnieks at vt

Mar 15, 2012, 2:03 PM

Post #21 of 40 (2328 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 13:35:13 PDT, George Herbert said:
> What, senior network people testing out new test/transitional space at
> home before they test it at work is bad?

Either that, or Randy was being snarky about how long the promise to *only* use
the address space for numbering CGN interfaces and not as additional RFC1918
space was going to last in reality....


bensons at queuefull

Mar 15, 2012, 2:08 PM

Post #22 of 40 (2330 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

I'm sure it happened much sooner than 72 hours post allocation. In fact, there were probably folks already squatting on that space long before any of this. Maybe their life just got a little easier. :)

Cheers,
-Benson


On Mar 15, 2012, at 3:57 PM, Robert E. Seastrom wrote:

>
> More like "wasting no time in fulfilling the prophesy that people will
> treat it like just another rfc1918 space and deploy it wherever they want".
>
> not that randy is likely to get bitten because he's not behind a cgn
> nor is he planning to be, but still, that took all of what, 72 hours?
>
> -r
>
> George Herbert <george.herbert [at] gmail> writes:
>
>> What, senior network people testing out new test/transitional space at
>> home before they test it at work is bad?
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 6:26 AM, Jérôme Nicolle <jerome [at] ceriz> wrote:
>>> Le 15/03/12 07:59, Randy Bush a écrit :
>>>> and i have configured two home LANs to use it
>>>
>>> Sooooo wrong...
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jérôme Nicolle
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -george william herbert
>> george.herbert [at] gmail
>


george.herbert at gmail

Mar 15, 2012, 2:08 PM

Post #23 of 40 (2332 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Robert E. Seastrom <rs [at] seastrom> wrote:
>
> More like "wasting no time in fulfilling the prophesy that people will
> treat it like just another rfc1918 space and deploy it wherever they want".
>
> not that randy is likely to get bitten because he's not behind a cgn
> nor is he planning to be, but still, that took all of what, 72 hours?
>
> -r

I think this is people reading their preconceived notions onto the situation.

I understand the policy disagreement about having the space in the
first place. That said...

Your and Jerome's reactions seem to amount to "Not only should you
never have done this, actually testing it in the normal informal
operational area once it's here and approved is a further insult."

My counterargument is - if you are suggesting people should be less
professional about testing out the new space than they are for any
other new thing, then you're being political and not operational.
Operationally this is exactly the right thing to have Randy do.

He certainly didn't need to do this because he's exhausted 1918 space
at home (well, I hope not... 8-).


--
-george william herbert
george.herbert [at] gmail


bill at herrin

Mar 15, 2012, 2:24 PM

Post #24 of 40 (2320 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Robert E. Seastrom <rs [at] seastrom> wrote:
>> Le 15/03/12 07:59, Randy Bush a écrit :
>>> and i have configured two home LANs to use it
>
> More like "wasting no time in fulfilling the prophesy that people will
> treat it like just another rfc1918 space and deploy it wherever they want".
>
> not that randy is likely to get bitten because he's not behind a cgn
> nor is he planning to be, but still, that took all of what, 72 hours?

That's OK. I've configured two home LANs to use 147.28.0.0/16 and I'm
not expecting any problems either.

-Bill


--
William D. Herrin ................ herrin [at] dirtside  bill [at] herrin
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004


rs at seastrom

Mar 15, 2012, 2:25 PM

Post #25 of 40 (2324 views)
Permalink
Re: shared address space... a reality! [In reply to]

George Herbert <george.herbert [at] gmail> writes:

> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:57 PM, Robert E. Seastrom <rs [at] seastrom> wrote:
>>
>> More like "wasting no time in fulfilling the prophesy that people will
>> treat it like just another rfc1918 space and deploy it wherever they want".
>>
>> not that randy is likely to get bitten because he's not behind a cgn
>> nor is he planning to be, but still, that took all of what, 72 hours?
>>
>> -r
>
> I think this is people reading their preconceived notions onto the situation.
>
> I understand the policy disagreement about having the space in the
> first place. That said...
>
> Your and Jerome's reactions seem to amount to "Not only should you
> never have done this, actually testing it in the normal informal
> operational area once it's here and approved is a further insult."
>
> My counterargument is - if you are suggesting people should be less
> professional about testing out the new space than they are for any
> other new thing, then you're being political and not operational.
> Operationally this is exactly the right thing to have Randy do.
>
> He certainly didn't need to do this because he's exhausted 1918 space
> at home (well, I hope not... 8-).

In the unlikely but not impossible event that Randy is on 1918 space
at home and has the external address of his consumer home gateway
configured into this space, and thence to a CGN appliance or blade in
the Big Router at his perimeter where he gets NATted into a globally
unique address (i.e., the meat in a NAT444 sandwich), or something
similar, then I certainly stand corrected. I encourage this sort of
testing.

I'm not reading "my preconceived notions" of anything other than
Randy's personality and very vocal assertions of what people would do
with this space if it got assigned into my assessment of what's going
on here.

Inasmuch as I am pretty sure I'm in Randy's .procmailrc, y'all will
have to ask him directly; don't expect him to chime in replying to my
mail.

-r

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All NANOG users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.