On Wed, 3 Feb 2010, Joel M Snyder wrote:
This information is very different from the RIPE Labs experiment which I think showed that certain "obvious" addresses (1.1.1.1 seemed to be the kicker in my short reading of their report) were being mis-used heavily. But I suspect that 27/8 would have similar issues to 45/8.
I would hope that the APNIC would opt not to assign networks that would contain 1.1.1.1 or 1.2.3.4 to customers for exactly that reason. The signal-to-noise ratio for those addresses is likely pretty high. The noise is likely contained on many internal networks for now because a corresponding route doesn't show up in the global routing table at the moment. Once that changes.... I could see holding those prefixes aside for research purposes (spam traps, honey pots, etc...). jms