In message <[email protected]>, Nick Hilliard <[email protected]> wrote:
>Ronald F. Guilmette via db-wg wrote on 21/09/2020 09:47: >> inetnum: 57.224.0.0 - 57.255.255.255 > >Wasn't the whole of 57.0.0.0/8 registered to SITA? > >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IPv4_address_blocks > >57.0.0.0/8 RIPE NCC 1995-05 Formerly SITA. Thank you Nick. I guess that (mostly) clears up the mystery. I'm not sure that the created date should be altered however when an existing block, legacy or otherwise, is simply shrunk, as appears to have happaned in this case. Doing that could cause confusion.
