On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 02:46:49PM -0500, Jay Ashworth wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
So, in short, UMD will still own the losing allocation, and be able to make relatively sure nothing else is placed at that IP (though of course they won't necessarily be able to make sure no one hijacks that entire prefix -- does Renesys have a pay-special-attention list?)
But how do you know the Renesys allocations haven't been hijacked??
I know you're being a smartass, Bill, but you're right: I assume Renesys has made provisions for that, but I don't know what they are.
No doubt they'll pop in and post a link to a blog post they wrote 5 years ago which explains. ;-)
Cheers, -- jra
the smart-ass answer to the nagging question on prefix reuse is: "Top Men are working on it" A more reasoned (maybe) response might be: To my knowledge, there is tension between creating "golden" addresses and address flexablity/reuse. I'd really like to swing back toward address flexability/reuse, but there is a whole lot of inertia behind the "golden" address crowd. Of the six renumbering events that come to mind, four of the prefixes are sequestered. The two that are not were in net 10. I am unaware of -anyone- who still points at the old addresses in net 10 space. I think there were other renumbering events, but have not kept track of the old prefix use. /bill