On 26.01 19:57, Thilo Salmon wrote:

Hello everyone,

when RIPE received 82/8 from IANA about a year ago, there has been a discussion on potential routing issues due to ancient filters on this list. That thread went far enough to raise the question whether or not subnets in question should be returned. Getting my daily fix of tech rants I noticed this issue appears to have resurfaced in the mainstream media at

http://heise.de/newsticker/data/hob-26.01.04-000/ (German) http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://heise.de/newsticker/data/hob-26.01.04-000/ (Google translation)

Well I'd call that a perfect example of "distributing responsibility".

We received a prefix from within this network which we plan to use soon and I am now wondering whether or not we can expect to run into problems. Going through a number of looking glasses I could see my announcement just fine. But then, ISPs who offer lookging glass services are probably more likely to keep their filters up to date.

Has anybody used 82/8 subnets and gathered real life experience on how they route? I'd much rather be prepared, if this turns into a teaching assignment.

You might have a look using the RIPE NCC service called RIS: http://www.ripe.net/ripencc/pub-services/np/ris/index.html more particular http://www.ris.ripe.net/cgi-bin/risprefix.cgi Looking for more specifics of 82/8 around midnight today yields more than 21k entries of 930 distinct prefixes. To me this means it is routed pretty ubiquitously. I will send you the file privately because it is more tham 2MB. Daniel