ARIN to allocate from 74/8 & 75/8
Apologies for duplicate messages. ARIN will begin allocating IP address space from 74.0.0.0 /8 and 75.0.0.0 /8 within the next 2 weeks. ARIN was issued 74 /8, 75 /8, and 76 /8 by the IANA on June 17, 2005. Connectivity testing is currently being done by Team Cymru on the following three /20s (one from each /8). All of these test allocations originate with AS36666. 74.63.0.0/20 75.127.0.0/20 76.191.0.0/20 This is a reminder message that you may need to adjust any filters you have in place for these three blocks accordingly. For informational purposes, a list of ARIN's currently administered IP blocks can be found at: http://www.arin.net/reference/ip_blocks.html#ipv4 Regards, Leslie Nobile Director, Registration Services American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN)
Connectivity testing is currently being done by Team Cymru on the following three /20s (one from each /8). All of these test allocations originate with AS36666.
74.63.0.0/20 75.127.0.0/20 76.191.0.0/20
and how is that testing being done? how do we test that we can reach the prefixes? i.e. is there a pingable address in each, as has been discussed here just a few times? randy
randy, all, On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 10:37:13AM -1000, Randy Bush wrote:
Connectivity testing is currently being done by Team Cymru on the following three /20s (one from each /8). All of these test allocations originate with AS36666.
74.63.0.0/20 75.127.0.0/20 76.191.0.0/20
and how is that testing being done?
look in the routing tables of routeviews/ripe/cymru/renesys peers?
how do we test that we can reach the prefixes?
look in your routing table?
i.e. is there a pingable address in each, as has been discussed here just a few times?
ping is ok, but routing table entry existence seems better. ping can fail for lots of reasons and what we're really testing is routing, not icmp end-to-end, right? if it's useful, i'd be happy to report what percentage of my peers have/don't have routes to these prefixes. todd
randy
_______________________________________________ afnog mailing list
-- _____________________________________________________________________ todd underwood director of operations & security renesys - interdomain intelligence todd@renesys.com www.renesys.com
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005, Todd Underwood wrote:
randy, all,
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 10:37:13AM -1000, Randy Bush wrote:
Connectivity testing is currently being done by Team Cymru on the following three /20s (one from each /8). All of these test allocations originate with AS36666.
74.63.0.0/20 75.127.0.0/20 76.191.0.0/20
and how is that testing being done?
i.e. is there a pingable address in each, as has been discussed here just a few times?
ping is ok, but routing table entry existence seems better. ping can fail for lots of reasons and what we're really testing is routing, not icmp end-to-end, right?
actually, routing is only half the problem (or some portion less than ALL of it atleast). Perhaps the traffic gets/got acl'd somewhere even though there are routes? I think Randy's asking: "Is there a webserver or ping host out there we can test from inside our network to inside proposed new network(s)?"
if it's useful, i'd be happy to report what percentage of my peers have/don't have routes to these prefixes.
that might be neat too :) on your webpage perhaps?
if it's useful, i'd be happy to report what percentage of my peers have/don't have routes to these prefixes.
route-views and ris provide pretty good views of route propagation. but, as you seem to understand, that's only half the story. luckily, the other, more useful, half is easily testable if arin/cymru would just follow the long-discussed path. randy
Hi, Randy. ] but, as you seem to understand, that's only half the story. luckily, ] the other, more useful, half is easily testable if arin/cymru would ] just follow the long-discussed path. We couldn't agree more! That's why we stood up the following three pingable IP addresses prior to announcing the test prefixes. 74.63.1.2 75.127.1.2 76.191.1.2 Sorry those weren't announced sooner! Thanks, Rob, for Team Cymru. -- Rob Thomas http://www.cymru.com Shaving with Occam's razor since 1999.
Todd, On Tue, 20 September 2005 16:49:20 -0400, Todd Underwood wrote: [..]
look in the routing tables of routeviews/ripe/cymru/renesys peers?
Speaking of experience there is a difference potentially between rfc1918/bogus/unallocated filters on an interface that likely do reference a prefix list (no le/ge on Junipers) - and a policy that handles BGP announcements. It surely can happen (and did happen) that the BGP announcements itself made it just fine while the filters on the customer/ peer links where not at all updated yet (if they filter BGP announcements for unallocated at all, etc). Much less people filter BGP that hard, if at all, for unallocated/ bogus, but rather keep the firewall policies clean. Alexander
On Tue, 20 Sep 2005, Randy Bush wrote:
74.63.0.0/20 75.127.0.0/20 76.191.0.0/20
and how is that testing being done? how do we test that we can reach the prefixes? i.e. is there a pingable address in each, as has been discussed here just a few times?
I did get a private response indicating that X.X.1.2 is pingable in all of the above. -- -- Todd Vierling <tv@duh.org> <tv@pobox.com> <todd@vierling.name>
participants (7)
-
Alexander Koch -
Christopher L. Morrow -
Leslie Nobile -
Randy Bush -
Rob Thomas -
Todd Underwood -
Todd Vierling