Similar to 1.0.0.0/8 case, which was allocated to APNIC last year or so...
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 6:47 AM, <bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 06:36:12AM -0600, Robert Bonomi wrote: >> > From nanog-bounces+bonomi=mail.r-bonomi....@nanog.org Sun Jan 15 02:02:00 >> > 2012 >> > Subject: Re: Whois 172/12 >> > From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <patr...@ianai.net> >> > Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 02:58:11 -0500 >> > To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org> >> > >> > Read RFC1918. >> > >> > Likely a machine on his local network (i.e. behind the same NAT box) is >> > hitting him. >> >> >> Patrick, >> I'v read RFC-1918. I cannot find *any* reference to 172.0/12, as the OP >> was asking about. 172.16/12, yes. but not 172.0/12. Can you please clarify >> your advice? >> >> ZZ > > > so as a stylistic point, 172/12 is supposed to equal 172.0.0.0/12? > > if memory serves, back in the day, there were records of allocations > in this space, > pre-ARIN. When RFC 1918 was settled on, there were some folks blocking > 172.0.0.0/8 > so there was talk of relocating those folks into other space. > > /bill >
