shared address space... a reality!

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
OriginAS:
NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED

2

Already updated my martians acl and deployed it internally...

3

this also means you should probably filter the 6to4 mapped address range
from 2002:a40::/48 to 2002:a7f:ffff::/48 since those have no chance of
making it home.

4

There's an app for that!

5

Hi,

NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
OriginAS:
NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED

Already updated my martians acl and deployed it internally...

this also means you should probably filter the 6to4 mapped address range
from 2002:a40::/48 to 2002:a7f:ffff::/48 since those have no chance of
making it home.

is my hex going bad...?

no mine is, or I'm lapsing into 10/8

or should it be 2002:6440:: ......

2002:6440::/48 to 2002:647f:ffff::/48

6

GOOD.

Now I can BOTH keep sticking my head in the sand AND get NEW RFC 1918
space to number my devices!

Trailing edge WINS!

Congrats, all you people who joined the ietf mailing list to get your
VOTE through. You can sign off now and continue non-contributing to the
developement of the future.

7

Did IANA have to justify this space to ARIN or was it just given to them no questions asked because a draft RFC specified a need for a /10?

8

see the discussion in PPML/arin-announce... my recollection is
something like this happened (paraphrased for the tl/dr crowd):
1) someone wanted more 1918^H^H^Hshared-transition space
2) a policy proposal came to ARIN's PP meeting
3) the policy proposal ran around for a time making friends
4) the proposal passed and the ARIN BoT essentially got a message from
IANA/IESG saying:
   "Hey, before you leap... lookout, perhaps the IETF should weigh in?"
5) an IETF draft was drafted (which later had a baby... so there are 2
versions/parts flying about)
6) the main draft was finalized and sent along to the RFC editor, and
made into a BCP
   <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg09959.html>
7) IANA received this /10 from ARIN

-chris

9

Thanks Chris for the update to the list. One minor clarification for the
community with regards to:

4) the proposal passed and the ARIN BoT essentially got a message from
IANA/IESG saying:
   "Hey, before you leap... lookout, perhaps the IETF should weigh in?"

After the ARIN Advisory Council forwarded the policy to the ARIN Board of
Trustees for consideration,
the Trustees directed the President, John Curran, to consult with the IAB
and IESG on the potential
issues of adopting said draft policy prior to taking any further policy
action.

Regards,

Nate Davis
Chief Operating Officer
American Registry for Internet Numbers

10

NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10
OriginAS:
NetName: SHARED-ADDRESS-SPACE-RFCTBD-IANA-RESERVED

Did IANA have to justify this space to ARIN or was it just given to them no
questions asked because a draft RFC specified a need for a /10?

see the discussion in PPML/arin-announce... my recollection is
something like this happened (paraphrased for the tl/dr crowd):
1) someone wanted more 1918^H^H^Hshared-transition space
2) a policy proposal came to ARIN's PP meeting
3) the policy proposal ran around for a time making friends
4) the proposal passed and the ARIN BoT essentially got a message from
IANA/IESG saying:
"Hey, before you leap... lookout, perhaps the IETF should weigh in?"

Well, actually, the ARIN board^H^H^H^H^HCEO went to IESG saying
"mother may I" would be a more accurate description of the process.

5) an IETF draft was drafted (which later had a baby... so there are 2
versions/parts flying about)

Actually, draft-weil was floated before the ARIN policy proposal IIRC.
The other draft (draft-bdgks) came after, essentially in response to the
statement by the ARIN board/CEO that getting the policy implemented
would require IESG approval.

6) the main draft was finalized and sent along to the RFC editor, and
made into a BCP
<Protocol Action: 'IANA Reserved IPv4 Prefix for Shared Address Space' to Best Current Practice (draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request-15.txt);
7) IANA received this /10 from ARIN

Otherwise, yeah, I think that about sums it up.

Owen

11

thanks! history is important here.

12

NetRange: 100.64.0.0 - 100.127.255.255
CIDR: 100.64.0.0/10

Already updated my martians acl and deployed it internally...

and i have configured two home LANs to use it

randy

13

:wink: So that is what "very rough consensus" looks like operationally!
IESG Note
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg09959.html

Christian

14

:wink: So that is what "very rough consensus" looks like operationally!

seems to be

15

Christian de Larrinaga wrote:

:wink: So that is what "very rough consensus" looks like operationally!
IESG Note
Protocol Action: 'IANA Reserved IPv4 Prefix for Shared Address Space' to Best Current Practice (draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request-15.txt)

Instead, I wonder whether the last phrases of the note, "the IETF
remain committed to the deployment of IPv6" is the consensus,
however rough, or not.

It might be so, if people silently ignoring IPv6 are not counted.

            Masataka Ohta

16

Le 15/03/12 07:59, Randy Bush a �crit :

and i have configured two home LANs to use it

Sooooo wrong...

17

Policy proposals for "specialized technical allocations"
are best considered by the IETF. ARIN was aware of the
RFC 2860 (the MOU between ICANN and the IAB) which said
as much, and once we confirmed this understanding with
the IAB, ARIN directed the community to make use of the
IETF process to develop an appropriate RFC for an IANA
assignment.

ARIN was notified by the IANA that the RFC was approved
and was asked if we could assign sufficient resources to
them for this purpose. The ARIN Board approved assigning
back to the IANA a /10 block out of one of the /8's we
received from them in 2010. The IANA registry has been
now updated accordingly: http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.xml#note5

Thanks! (and hope this clarifies things)
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN

18

thanks! history is important here.

reading this this morning, my comment sounds more flippant than I
meant. I really did mean that getting the details right was important.

Policy proposals for "specialized technical allocations"
are best considered by the IETF. ARIN was aware of the
RFC 2860 (the MOU between ICANN and the IAB) which said
as much, and once we confirmed this understanding with
the IAB, ARIN directed the community to make use of the
IETF process to develop an appropriate RFC for an IANA
assignment.

ARIN was notified by the IANA that the RFC was approved
and was asked if we could assign sufficient resources to
them for this purpose. The ARIN Board approved assigning
back to the IANA a /10 block out of one of the /8's we
received from them in 2010. The IANA registry has been
now updated accordingly: IANA IPv4 Address Space Registry

Thanks! (and hope this clarifies things)

does, thanks!

19

What, senior network people testing out new test/transitional space at
home before they test it at work is bad?

20

More like "wasting no time in fulfilling the prophesy that people will
treat it like just another rfc1918 space and deploy it wherever they want".

not that randy is likely to get bitten because he's not behind a cgn
nor is he planning to be, but still, that took all of what, 72 hours?

-r

George Herbert <george.herbert@gmail.com> writes: