It's a good idea, but of course that requires someone in the allocated
block to have a list of addresses to ping, all over the net.
Furthermore, the pinging really should be done from an actual use of
the net, and not just from, say, the RIR that allocated the block.
(Pinging a single address in new blocks would have that requirement,
too, of course.)
--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
this has probably already been thought-out, but outbound reachability
testing *from* the address block to a representative spread of
addressing makes much more sense and would be much more indicative of
forwarding (versus routing) problems, and would do so with some method
and statistical reliability. presumably that is coming and just
hasn't been discussed or carried out yet.It's a good idea, but of course that requires someone in the allocated
block to have a list of addresses to ping, all over the net.
as i said privately to someone, a few problems
o the scale of destinations is far to large.
o how are you to know what is an important host inside of a
complex enterprise? the granularity of routing/filtering
within sites is not externally visible.
o many of a large complex enterprise's sources from which it may
be desirable to test may be in 1918 space.
o the pingees may not like being pinged.
the goal here was for isps and enterprises who want to be good
citizens to be able to test.
randy
Don't forget the enterprises that number themselves out of 'unallocated'
space 
which might very well be the space that was just recently
released.
It's a really fun conversation when your customer (or some enterprise)
realizes that RFC1918 is there for a reason, and that their 10k person
network is going to need a really complicated renumber out of the
72.x.x.x/8 and into 10.x.x.x 
Suffice it to say that there are a myriad of reasons these new allocations
could seem 'broken' to folks. Testing real-world applications seems like a
reasonable first step. Having an org (cymru in this case) able to provide
http/icmp targets on these prior to RIR allocations going bananas seems
like that first step. Those that wish to test can, those that don't
don't... simple?
Suffice it to say that there are a myriad of reasons these new
allocations could seem 'broken' to folks.
tell me about it. i am having fun testing from various (we believe
to be) *unfiltered* places, and some work and some don't. e.g. we
can ping from the westin (a class B going out to sprint and verio
stm1s) but not from my hawai`i dsl (an island provider where i know
and trust the very clued systems staff, and they say it's not
filtered). i can ping from univ of oregon but not from the linx,
blah blah blah. the suspicion is that cymru has filters! [0]
Testing real-world applications seems like a reasonable first
step. Having an org (cymru in this case) able to provide
http/icmp targets on these prior to RIR allocations going bananas
seems like that first step. Those that wish to test can, those
that don't don't... simple?
agree.
this is the way to go, but it needs some work. but this is the
first try, so cut 'em a bit of slack. if it's not working
flawlessly in the morning, and i am at gmt-10, we can demand a full
refund and flame 'em to death :-).
randy
Such lists aren't _that_ hard to come by. It's been done.
If anyone from cymru wants to talk to me about what I did with 69/8 (69box), or get some data, they know how to reach me.
Hi, NANOGers.
] the suspicion is that cymru has filters! [0]
Au contraire! The device is completely unfiltered. How crazy of
me. 
Randy, I'm debugging the legitimate issues you share with me now.
Stay tuned!
Folks who trip across anomolies and the like should contact us at
team-cymru@cymru.com.
Thanks,
Rob.