On 18 Sep 2014, at 09:44, Richard Hill <[email protected]> wrote: > For what concerns IP addresses, IANA at present publishes top level > information, for example the list of /16 IPv4 allocations at: > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.xhtml > > That list has not always been up to date regarding what happened to the > legacy (old Class A) allocations. For example it still lists 16/8 as being > allocated to Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC). But in fact DEC was > acquired by Compaq some time ago, and Compaq was then acquired by > Hewlett-Packard (HP), so 16/8 is now allocated to HP. This is correctly > shown in the ARIN WHOIS.
IIUC the above IANA list essentially publishes the details of who these /8s were allocated to and when those allocations were made. For instance that list says 193/8, 194/8 and 195/8 were allocated to RIPE NCC in 1993. [I stumbled across this nugget yesterday.] But RIPE NCC wasn't incorporated until 1997. Obviously there was a RIPE NCC in the early 1990s even before it had its own distinct legal identity. 196/8 is tagged as LEGACY but is administered by AFRINIC. IMO it's useful to have that sort of historical info even though making sense of it takes a bit of effort. > So I wonder whether it wouldn't be more efficient for the NRO to publish > directly this sort of information, since the RIRs are actually the > authoritative sources. I'm confused Richard. ARIN's whois -- and presumably all the other data ARIN publishes -- correctly shows who is the current holder of 16/8. Could you please explain why someone else should take responsibility for this task and how that would be more efficient? And for whom? If the NRO is to take on that role, it will need extra funding and infrastructure. Which will presumably have to come from the RIRs who are already providing the funds and infrastructure which currently supports this function. That said, there are improvements which could be made to help people identify legacy numbering resources. [Disclaimer: I'm working on a project which in part is trying to do just that and finding this out is more awkward than it should be.] That's probably a discussion for another WG, perhaps AP and/or NCC Services. It doesn't seem appropriate to this WG at all.
