It is the DISA DOD NIC at:
https://disa.mil/About/Contact
Which will give you the DISA help desk phone number.
John Lee
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 3:57 AM Chris Knipe wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> Except for the email on ARIN's details, does anyone else have a contact
> for the DoD?
>
> We are
I used to help large companies rearchitect their addressing, implement
IPv6, etc. for a living, so no one is more sympathetic than I am about
how difficult it can be to make these changes. However, I have to ask,
how far backwards do we want to bend for those that refuse to migrate?
There
On January 20, 2021 at 16:06 nanog@nanog.org (Grant Taylor via NANOG) wrote:
> On 1/20/21 3:50 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote:
> > Around 300MB/day.
>
> Interesting.
>
> I see 50-70 MB / day for text only newsgroups.
>
> Perhaps I want to step up to more than text only on some of my
> due to it being so massive and unused for so long, certain large
> corporations that have run out of RFC1918, etc. space have started
> using it internally.
i first saw that on a traceroute from my hotel at ripe bologna in 2001.
i was told i was lng late to finding it.
randy
On 1/20/21 3:50 PM, b...@theworld.com wrote:
Around 300MB/day.
Interesting.
I see 50-70 MB / day for text only newsgroups.
Perhaps I want to step up to more than text only on some of my servers.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
On January 20, 2021 at 13:41 b...@herrin.us (William Herrin) wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 12:40 PM wrote:
> > 2. Usenet is dead and besides a full feed is 20+TB/day because it's
> > dead, but 20TB/day...
>
> Hi Barry,
>
> How much is it per day if you skip the groups distributing
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 12:40 PM wrote:
> 2. Usenet is dead and besides a full feed is 20+TB/day because it's
> dead, but 20TB/day...
Hi Barry,
How much is it per day if you skip the groups distributing
finger-quote "linux isos"?
Regards,
Bill Herrin
> And don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating against v6. I'm merely explaining
> how
> difficult it can be to migrate. In most large companies, the network is like
> PG (the power utility California). If it works, nobody says well done. But
> if
> the power is out, everyone gets angry and asks
On 1/20/21 12:52 PM, John Curran wrote:
> On 20 Jan 2021, at 12:17 PM, Bryan Fields
> mailto:br...@bryanfields.net>> wrote:
>>
>> AFAIK IANA and the RIR's cannot enforce use of IP space assignments on any
>> network.
>
> While route hijacking isn't necessarily an ARIN issue, I will note
>
Additionally, examples of impersonating a corporate entity to acquire
unused IP space (Erie Forge and Steel's /16, anyone?) undoubtedly fall
under existing, pre-internet interstate commerce fraud laws...
http://web.mit.edu/net-security/Camp/2003/DBowie_IP_Hijacking.pdf
Organizations that I have seen doing as you describe, because they ran out
of RFC1918 IP space, are also often using their existing private IP space
wastefully in the first place. Rather than using DoD /8s internally, if
they absolutely need to support v4-only equipment on their internal
Through a coincidence of hardware failures "out there", which should
come back soon, and admittedly some inattentiveness as peers went
away, The World finds itself looking for some Usenet peers.
Not a full feed, we can talk.
1. OT? Feel free to point me to a better place which anyone is likely
- On Jan 20, 2021, at 6:58 AM, j k wrote:
Hi,
> My question becomes, what level of risk are these companies taking on by using
> the DoD ranges on their internal networks? And have they quantified the costs
> of this outage against moving to IPv6?
Not so long ago, while working for a
> On Wednesday, January 20, 2021 13:48, Owen DeLong <...> wrote:
>
> Do you think this still holds true if DoD were to (e.g.) sell that space
> to $CLOUD_PROVIDER or $ISP or $SUPPLIER or…?
>
> I don’t have any knowledge of any events surrounding this space
> currently, but I do know that press
On 1/20/21 1:48 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
Do you think this still holds true if DoD were to (e.g.) sell that space to
$CLOUD_PROVIDER or $ISP or $SUPPLIER or…?
I don’t have any knowledge of any events surrounding this space currently, but
I do know that press releases and congress have discussed
> On Jan 20, 2021, at 07:11 , Brandon Martin wrote:
>
> On 1/20/21 9:58 AM, j k wrote:
>> My question becomes, what level of risk are these companies taking on by
>> using the DoD ranges on their internal networks? And have they quantified
>> the costs of this outage against moving to IPv6?
Brandon -
Agreed – the key phrase being "within a more limited scope” …
/John
> On 20 Jan 2021, at 1:26 PM, Brandon Martin wrote:
>
> On 1/20/21 12:52 PM, John Curran wrote:
>>
>> While route hijacking isn't necessarily an ARIN issue, I will
>> note that several US law
for..
unallocated ipv4 space... created today.. 20210120
https://www.radb.net/query?advanced_query=1=-M+196.52.0.0%2F14&-T+option=_option=&-i+option==RADB
There is also a bunch of RIPE-NONAUTH and ARIN-NONAUTH that is awaiting
cleanup by RIPE and ARIN, they have been notified.
For a little ba
On 1/20/21 12:52 PM, John Curran wrote:
>
> While route hijacking isn't necessarily an ARIN issue, I will note
> that several US law enforcement agencies (FBI & NCIS Cybercrime units) are
> quite interested in such events and do investigate them looking for criminal
> activity.
>
> (See
On 20 Jan 2021, at 12:17 PM, Bryan Fields
mailto:br...@bryanfields.net>> wrote:
AFAIK IANA and the RIR's cannot enforce use of IP space assignments on any
network.
While route hijacking isn't necessarily an ARIN issue, I will note
that several US law enforcement agencies (FBI & NCIS
On 1/20/21 10:05 AM, Dorn Hetzel wrote:
> I am aware of some companies that have used parts of a DoD /8 internally to
> address devices in the field that are too old to ever support IPV6. Those
> devices also never interact with the public internet, and never will, so
> for them, I guess the only
Matt Harris|Infrastructure Lead Engineer
816-256-5446|Direct
Looking for something?
Helpdesk Portal|Email Support|Billing Portal
We build and deliver end-to-end IT solutions.
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:56 AM Mel Beckman wrote:
> Ostap,
>
> Why was this prefix revoked? And what is your interest
Ostap,
Why was this prefix revoked? And what is your interest in the matter? I ask
because, of late, there have been attempts to lockdown African Internet access
by various political factions, for example the situation in Uganda.
-mel
> On Jan 20, 2021, at 8:33 AM, Ostap Efremov wrote:
>
Yeah, definitely talking about use that is deep behind multiple layers of
firewalls, or maybe even air-gapped with respect to routable protocols. I
won't say what sort of industry runs large piles of ancient gear, but you
could probably guess...
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 10:13 AM Brandon Martin
I am aware of some companies that have used parts of a DoD /8 internally to
address devices in the field that are too old to ever support IPV6. Those
devices also never interact with the public internet, and never will, so
for them, I guess the only risk would be that some other internal system
Hi,
196.52.0.0/14 was recently revoked by AFRINIC.
However, more than 350 prefixes inside of this /14 are currently still
announced.
This is all unallocated and should not be routed at all.
Example
https://bgp.he.net/net/196.54.129.0/24#_netinfo
Here is a full list of them
Hello,
I'm in need off a RADB contact.
I have reached out to them multiple times the past 72 hours requesting
urgent removal of all IRR records for a recently revoked afrinic /14
However they did not reply and did not remove any records which belong
to this unallocated ip space.
This concerns
Folks –
Please note upcoming TLS 1.1 deprecation and RDAP URL changes – if you need to
update your systems, please start this process sufficiently early to avoid
impacts.
Thanks!
/John
John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers
Begin forwarded message:
From: ARIN
I recently had a discussion with an Asian ISP that was asking the IETF to
PLEASE re-declare DoD space to be private space so that they could use it. This
particular ISP uses IPv6 extensively (a lot of their services are in fact
IPv6-only) but has trouble with its enterprise customers. Frankly,
On 1/20/21 9:58 AM, j k wrote:
My question becomes, what level of risk are these companies taking on by
using the DoD ranges on their internal networks? And have they
quantified the costs of this outage against moving to IPv6?
Honestly I can't think of much unless maybe they're a defense
My question becomes, what level of risk are these companies taking on by
using the DoD ranges on their internal networks? And have they
quantified the costs of this outage against moving to IPv6?
Joe Klein
"inveniet viam, aut faciet" --- Seneca's Hercules Furens (Act II, Scene 1)
"*I skate to
Thank you, everyone, for the advice, input, and suggestions, both on-
and off-list.
Got a few sales pitches too, which was to be expected. :) All good.
Much appreciated, again.
Cheers,
- bryan
On 1/19/21 4:44 PM, Bryan Holloway wrote:
Hey gang ...
Looking for a reputable
I was wondering if someone from Spectrum engineering could hit me out of
band. We have a customer in one of our data centers that is having some
strange routing issues through Cogent and Spectrum AS's 7843 & 12271.
Was wondering if someone could share some insight BGP looking glass type
info
Indeed.
/John
> On Jan 20, 2021, at 8:47 AM, Cynthia Revström wrote:
>
> But if you do this, make sure you keep track of where you might have put
> policies like this in, in case the DoD sells some the space or whatever in
> the future.
I believe the DoD space might be a bit of a difficult one, because (correct
me if I am wrong here) due to it being so massive and unused for so long,
certain large corporations that have run out of RFC1918, etc. space
have started using it internally.
So my take on it is, don't consider it as a
Tom –
Most definitely: lack of routing history is not at all a reliable indicator of
the potential for valid routing of a given IPv4 block in the future, so best
practice suggest that allocated address space should not be blocked by others
without specific cause.
Doing otherwise opens one
36 matches
Mail list logo
