[arin-discuss] Good Stewardship by example, I'd like to RETURN a /20
Vaughn Thurman - Swift Systems
vaughn at swiftsystems.com
Wed Jul 22 21:24:28 EDT 2009
Um, that response is disconnected from the challenges of a rural ISP
Sent from my handheld
On Jul 22, 2009, at 8:42 PM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com>
wrote:
> If his ISP will route space he gets from another provider (or from
> ARIN), but won't give him space, then I know of lots of folks who
> will sell him a 10M Ethernet circuit in a datacenter somewhere,
> along with as much address space as he can justify under ARIN
> policies. He can then announce the space from both locations, with
> the datacenter circuit serving only as a backup last-resort in the
> event that the primary announcement (through their rural ISP) goes
> down. They can anycast their DNS and mail servers out of the
> datacenter, or simply tunnel all the packets back to their main
> network.
>
> -Scott
>
> 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 get
>> ting 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 jus
>> t throw the towel in because he isn’t large enough to get more IPv
>> 4 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