and published by IANA to document existing practices, not
to change previous practices. Eventually we'll use it.
The simpliest solution is for IANA to inform APNIC that it was an
oversight. The 223.255.255.0/24 network block within the 223/8 CIDR block
assigned to APNIC is still IANA-RESERVE
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> why would an APNIC/AP region specific issue need to be discussed
> on the NANOG list and not the RIPE/AFNOG/et.al. regional ops lists?
> This is a prefix delegated to the APregion and so they should be
> the ones who set the po
>
>
> > The outcome of the discussions at the Address Policy SIG will be posted
> > to this list.
>
> where, one hopes, discussion will continue, yes?
>
> randy
>
why would an APNIC/AP region specific issue need to be discussed
on the NANOG list and not the RIPE/AFNOG/et.al. r
> The outcome of the discussions at the Address Policy SIG will be posted
> to this list.
where, one hopes, discussion will continue, yes?
randy
hi Simon,
In light of the discussions on this list and subsequent to the posting
referenced below, use of this network has been added to the agenda of
the Address Policy SIG as an AOB discussion item by the community.
http://www.apnic.net/meetings/15/sigs/policy/index.html
The Address Polic
On Sun, 23 Feb 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So far, I've received no response from IANA or APNIC on the subject.
http://www.apnic.net/mailing-lists/apops/archive/2003/02/msg9.html
--
Simon Lyall.| Newsmaster | Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Senior Network/System Admin | Postm
> I can imagine there is some reason why this was originally reserved thats
> probably not valid any more..
It definately is not valid unless someone is living in the stone ages.
The network corresponds to the numerically highest Class C network,
and is reserved for a potential future classful s
I can imagine there is some reason why this was originally reserved thats
probably not valid any more..
However seems like a lot of effort to change documents and policies for a single
/24 !
Steve
On Thu, 20 Feb 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> 223.255.255.0/24 has historicall
223.255.255.0/24 has historically been designated as a special-use network
as it is the numerically highest Class C network. It is listed in
RFC3330 as Reserved but open for possible future allocation.
Now that 222/7 has been allocated to APNIC, the question comes up as to
whether it is
