[ppml] The WIANA registry
As I understand this, the WIANA has done what thousands of companies before
them have done -- they numbered their internal private network with
addresses that did not "belong" to them. Many companies have done this and
used RFC1918 space, many others have not. (Mine is one that uses both).
How is this any different? Sure, they have suggested that they might in the
future ask to assigned this address space for real. Well, I can state a lot
of things that I'd like to ask for. It certainly does not mean that I will
If at some point in time they have a need for assigned address space, they
would need to go through the same process as everyone else. If they find an
ISP dumb....er...short-sighted enough to announce the 1/8 space without a
proper address assignment, then that's a problem for that ISP and any other
ISP that accepts the advertisement.
However, IF they do follow the proper process to request address space AND
they can actually justify through that the process the assignment of a full
/8 network, then who gets hurt by giving them the address space that they
are already using?
Of course, by the time they get to that point, the 1/8 might be assigned to
someone else and they'd have to renumber their internal network. Well, they
are assigning their internal address space dynamically I hope. Either way,
they'd be in the same boat as thousands of other companies that have needed
to renumber their internal networks.
If they don't go through the proper process or can't justify that much
address space, then they don't get the address space that they want. Simple,
end of story.
There may indeed be problems with the registry process, but one
organization's use of a non-1918 address block on an internal network is
certainly not one of them.
From: Trevor Paquette [mailto:Trevor.Paquette at TeraGo.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 1:01 PM
To: ppml at arin.net
Subject: RE: [ppml] The WIANA registry
The way I see this whole issue is the following:
1) WIANA has unilaterally decided that they will be using the 1/8 IP
2) WIANA has stated that this network is 'a different physical medium to the
3) WIANA has stated that their network 'does not map directly into Internet
address space, external connections are translated and will perhaps
eventually slot into an ipv6 subnet'
Given (1), (2) and (3) above.. This is like running a private network. No
problem so far.
However, (here is the kicker)..
How long do you think it will be before they 'require' direct Internet
connectivity due to the problems imposed by Network Address Translation??
I'm talking end-user demand that they be able to connect via VPN to
corporate networks, email, IM, etc.. Most users don't care nor do they want
to learn about the nuances of NAT.. they just want their application to
work. Point, click, connect.
Given the above, I expect WIANA to say at some point in the future "Look, we
are already using this space and no-one else is; so just let us use it." All
without going through the mutually agreed upon processes, procedures and
justifications that everyone else must go through.
This, I believe, is the real problem with this 'Registry'..