cgrundemann at gmail.com
Wed Mar 31 23:51:16 EDT 2010
On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 18:48, Fred Baker <fred at cisco.com> wrote:
> well, you didn't answer my question, so maybe I shouldn't have to answer yours :-)
Fair enough - answer below. =)
> I have no problem with your statement in principle. I'm just wondering how you enforce it.
Annual renewal required of the registrant and annual
registrant-data-verification required of the registry (whois poc
verification or equivalent). Or, in the case of ULA-C, perhaps
pentennial renewal and verification would be adequate and appropriate.
...Or maybe annual for those blocks which the registry is providing
reverse DNS and pentennial for those with no service beyond basic
> >> On Mar 31, 2010 6:17 PM, "Fred Baker" <fred at cisco.com> queried:
> >> If you give a prefix to your favorite admin and have them number their network with it, and then re-assign the prefix to someone else, what's the probability that you have a collision?
Much greater than if you don't re-assign it. ;-)
> >> I think you need to accept that once put into use, a ULA will be in use by that administration permanently. You obviously see otherwise. Fill me in?
See my previous statements regarding the impermanence of organizations
and their networks.
More information about the ARIN-PPML