[arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example, I'd like to RETURN a /20

Wed Jul 22 20:34:41 EDT 2009

I think what some of the smaller guys are talking about is this.  I know of 1 ISP right now that is in a RURAL, RURAL area.  Doing a great job of providing “cable” speeds to his customers over the air.  His upstream has basically told him to f-off in terms of getting any more IPv4 addresses.  He has 300+ customers, so he doesn’t qualify for a /20.  He CAN’T multi-home, because there literally no other options in his area.

What is he to do?  Now ARIN freely handed out a /32 of IPv6 addresses to him, but that doesn’t do him any good.  Should he just throw the towel in because he isn’t large enough to get more IPv4 addresses?

Why can he have an IPv6 /32 but is nowhere near large enough for a /22 in the IPv6 range.  Or hell even a /23, he is easily big enough for a /23.  But ARIN’s minimum they will hand is a /20 if you are not multi-homed and a /22 if you are.

This guy is screwed until IPv6 is knee deep.

From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Vaughn Thurman - Swift Systems
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 7:23 PM
To: arin-discuss at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example, I'd like to RETURN a /20

Wow, so out come the naysayers... "Shut up you little fleas. Don't you know that the experts have spoken?  Why study the issue when others have already said it is not worth it."

The power of the press and public opinion are pretty powerful.  Does a protracted battle against the interests of small ISP types or the "Internet community" really suit HP, Apple, or any of the other space Easters if in the public eye?  Think about the good will a few have gotten on this list by committing to return space..

You don't get what you don't ask for.

Try!  Aim high and risk falling short.  Aiming low is too easy to succeed at for a group this bright.

~Vaughn

Sent from my handheld

On Jul 22, 2009, at 7:48 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com<mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:

On Jul 22, 2009, at 1:06 PM, Steve Wagner wrote:

As a note it's not just the /8's. I am in Idaho.  The State of Idaho has a Class B 164.165.0.0 All State government activities sit behind two different firewalls.

Micron technology 137.201.0.0. Sits behind firewalls

And so forth into perpetuity it seems

In this regard by reclaiming this address space that companies have, particularly when the coropration sits behind NAT firewalls is unjustified.  The ones I listed above use  Private address space behind the firewall i.e. 10.X.X.X etc. So why then would a company entity that does this need to retain their public Class A, B, C etc. There is no technical or administrative justification I can see.

Nevertheless, there was a comment about pre ARIN and Contract Law. Unfortunatley this may play the larger role over common sense.

While this is not the ultimate solution, it certainly can stem the tide for many years.

It would be an interesting study to examine the allocated IP address space by entity and determine how many of these organizations sit behind a NAT firewall, and only use a small portion of their allocation.
Reclamation has been repeatedly studied, and, in general, the conclusion matches the following excerpt from a Cisco Journal article:

http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_8-3/ipv4.html

Reclaiming Allocations
Another debate occasionally resurfaces about reclaiming some of the early allocations to further extend the lifetime of IPv4. Hopefully this article has shown that the ROI for that approach is going to be extremely low. Discussions around the Internet community show there is an expectation that it will take several years of substantive negotiation (in multiple court systems around the globe) to retrieve any /8s. Then following that effort and expense, the likelihood of even getting back more than a few /8 blocks is very low. Following the allocation growth trend, after several years of litigation the result is likely to be just a few months of additional resource added to the pool—and possibly not even a whole month. All this assumes IANA does not completely run out before getting any back, because running out would result in pentup demand that could immediately exhaust any returns.

If you can come up with credible figures indicating that there are at least 28 /8s worth of reclaimable space out there, then, reclamation efforts might be more interesting, but, I tend to doubt that is the case. If you can't reclaim at least 14 /8s, you don't even buy an additional year.

Owen

Regards,
Steve Wagner
Vice President of Operations
Syringa Networks, LLC
3795 S Development Ave, Suite 100
Boise, ID 83705
Office: 208.229.6104
Main: 208.229.6100
Emergency: 1.800.454.7214
Fax: 208.229.6110
Email: Stwagner at syringanetworks.net<mailto:Stwagner at syringanetworks.net>
Web: www.syringanetworks.net<http://www.syringanetworks.net>

"Idaho's Premier Fiber Optic Network"

Privilege and Confidentiality Notice
The information in this message is intended for the named recipients only. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, do not print it or disseminate it or its contents. In such event, please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the e-mail file immediately thereafter. Thank you.

-----Original Message-----
From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net<mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net> [mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of John Osmon
Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 1:43 PM
To: arin-discuss at arin.net<mailto:arin-discuss at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example, I'd like to RETURN a /20

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 01:32:19PM -0400, Joe Maimon wrote:

John Osmon wrote:

We're aren't going to save the IPv4 world by returning space, but
we *will* make it easier on soe folks that are coming to the table
(relatively) late.

Hate to be a downer, but not at the current burn rate.

Actually, I agree -- but don't tell the folks that think getting
a couple of /8s back from HP, Apple, and the DOD is going to significant
difference in the timing of IPv4 exhaustion.  :-)

I still think that anything you aren't using should go back to the
pool that allows new comers a chance to participate in
commerce/communication.  I don't, however, think that a slew of
/20s (or /8s) are going to make a big impact.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-discuss at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-discuss at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

_______________________________________________
ARIN-Discuss
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-discuss at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20090722/b36d97f2/attachment.html>