[arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example, I'd like to RETURN a /20
Ted Mittelstaedt
tedm at ipinc.net
Wed Jul 22 20:55:20 EDT 2009
So, your to have us believe that this 1 ISP has competitors who are
using a different upstream than he is, an upstream who is willing to
continue to provide them with public IPv4, so his competitors are going
to be at an advantage and he is not?
If there are no other options in the area then his competitors have to
use the same upstream he is using, and are being told to f-off by that
upstream when they ask for more numbers.
Meaning that he is no worse off than his competition.
He could offer a cheaper service that's privately numbered. Of course
he will need to put in a good translator. A Xeon running 64 bit Linux
with a lot of ram should suffice. It will handle well over 300 users.
He can also raise pricing on the public numbers and offer the private
stuff at what he's charging right now. (that's how the grocery stores
do it when they want people to switch brands)
If he has no other options, his rural customers have no other options
either. If his upstream is the only game in town then all his
competitors are using that upstream and are also being told to "f" off
by that upstream, so they have no extra IPv4 either. In other words,
he's at no more of a disadvantage than his competitors, and his customer
base is captive to him - so he can pretty much do to his customers the
same thing his upstream is doing to him.
I'm not saying this is a good or bad thing. I am saying that the claim
that he is screwed is absurd. Unless, of course, he's directly
competing against his upstream - that's a bit different. In which case,
even if he had his own IPv4 from ARIN, do you really think this upstream
will let him route it?
Ted
Nathaniel B. Lyon wrote:
> 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.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (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.
More information about the ARIN-discuss
mailing list