nanog mailing list archives

Re: Who has AS 1712?


From: bmanning () vacation karoshi com
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:28:50 +0000


 the joys of non-uniqueness.  ULAs are (going to be) your friends. :)

 back in the day, the IANA was pretty careful.  the contractors less so.
 SRI had the "connected" and "unconnected" databases - duplications abounded
 and when interconnection occured... renumbering ensued.  

 this is not a new or even recent problem.  It is certainly compounded by
 multiple actors and lack of clean slate.  Yet, I beleive that there will
 be a desire to "do the right thing" and this will get fixed.

 It might even lead to better tools and inter-actor releationships.

 Or it could melt into a pile of goo...

--bill


On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 06:21:00AM +0900, Randy Bush wrote:
Of course if it was already assigned when IANA said that (no dates on 
the link above) then maybe the fault is more IANA's for telling another 
RIR that they could allocate an ASN that another RIR already allocated. 

i suspect that, in the erx project, there may have been more than one
case of the iana saying "ok, X now manages this block, excpet of course
for those pieces already allocated by Y and Z."  and the latter were not
always well defined or easily learnable, and were not registered
directly with the iana, but other rirs.

<rant>

and the data are all buried in whois, which is not well-defined, stats
files, which are not defined, etc.  the rirs, in the thrall of nih (you
did know that ripe/ncc invented the bicycle), spent decades not agreeing
on common formats, protocols, or code.  this is one result thereof.
testosterone kills, and the community gets the collateral damage.

randy


Current thread: