[Collisions] "controlled interruption" - 127/8 versus RFC1918 space

David Conrad drc at virtualized.org
Thu Jan 9 18:15:21 UTC 2014


On Jan 9, 2014, at 8:22 AM, Rubens Kuhl <rubensk at nic.br> wrote:
>> Thoughts?  Value trade between possibly more effective notification vs. "protecting the sanctity" of RFC1918 space?
> We could also return both values either all times or on the second period in a round-robin fashion. 

I'd be a bit concerned that this would introduce non-determinism into the situation.  If 1918 space is going to be used, I'd be more comfortable doing a phased approach where its first all from one address (presumably 127/8), then all from another address block.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/collisions/attachments/20140109/41362b83/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 495 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.dns-oarc.net/pipermail/collisions/attachments/20140109/41362b83/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Collisions mailing list