Re: [sig-policy] prop-109v001: Allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APN

To: <sig-policy at apnic dot net>
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] prop-109v001: Allocate 1.0.0.0/24 and 1.1.1.0/24 to APNIC Labs as Research Prefixes
From: Geoff Huston <gih at apnic dot net>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 06:00:05 +1100
Delivered-to: sig-policy at mailman dot apnic dot net
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apnic.net; s=c3po; h=received:received:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer:return-path; bh=U5Ej6oqcia4VvXeJE7LPzB/6B8afmvdOtW55F+v8Mck=; b=DJo6qW/78jQBImxsRbYteGgBTMgXBj6G0impD5a+32AL6qcrBpDZYQmgPWvGHyzjP57EMpAr3jR1L faZM+FVnfIN3cliRLbg4LSs2jSnq4JmKzwBpPsgDb92zH05qCJrqqR+BtuiNFfk39FyL5Fa865fLD2 ELOGJdf5N6J0cFH0=
In-reply-to: <CABD+eSf34XnBuA7-dwhPEYV_WTbH8cMrANJptN8OAERfOf=wSA@mail.gmail.com>
List-archive: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailing-lists/sig-policy/>
List-help: <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=help>
List-id: APNIC SIG on resource management policy <sig-policy.lists.apnic.net>
List-post: <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net>
List-subscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/options/sig-policy>, <mailto:sig-policy-request@lists.apnic.net?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <CALS-_OooDv7pGUhqz0djV0WgAiqV2Sju1153cs=VNL__TV=fuA@mail.gmail.com> <CABD+eScmUyNnBfmvewtgdY1-rZa4kNSegdEFa_qpb1vVdK=y3A@mail.gmail.com> <m2r47vpbyj.wl%randy@psg.com> <CABD+eSf34XnBuA7-dwhPEYV_WTbH8cMrANJptN8OAERfOf=wSA@mail.gmail.com>

The proposal text reads:

  it was recommended that the covering /24
  prefix, and also 1.1.1.0/24 be withheld from allocation pending a
  decision as to the longer term disposition of these address prefixes.

I believe it was meant to read:

  it was recommended that the covering /24
  prefix, and also 1.0.0.0/24, be withheld from allocation pending a
  decision as to the longer term disposition of these address prefixes.

thanks,

  Geoff

On 29 Jan 2014, at 2:55 am, Sanjeev Gupta <sanjeev at dcs1 dot biz> wrote:

> 
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Randy Bush <randy at psg dot com> wrote:
>>>   addresses 1.1.1.1 as the single address with the highest level of
>>>   unsolicited traffic, and it was recommended that the covering /24
>>>   prefix, and also 1.1.1.0/24
>> Sorry, I am unclear, isn't the "covering /24" the same as "1.1.1.0/24"?
> 
> 1.1.1.0/24 covers 1.1.1.1/32
> 
> Randy, my point was that the text seems repetitive, reserving both 1.1.1.0/24 _and_ "the /24 covering 1.1.1.1"
> 
> -- 
> Sanjeev Gupta
> +65 98551208   http://sg.linkedin.com/in/ghane
> *              sig-policy:  APNIC SIG on resource management policy           *
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> sig-policy at lists dot apnic dot net
> http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy