[arin-ppml] Stepping forward, opening my mouth and removing all doubt about

[William Herrin]

On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm at ipinc.net> wrote:
> This is not correct - those big ISP's are big because they have a
> lot of customers - those customers are the ones using the IP numbers.

Ted,

I have yet to connect to a residential Internet service (be it 56k
modem, DSL or cable) that has assigned me an RFC1918 address. The
blackberry on my belt even appears to be using its own globally
routeable IP address.

How many hundreds of millions of addresses are consumed by similar uses?

Is it your position that more than 10% of those users would be
inconvenienced by having an RFC 1918 address behind a NAT box instead?

I recently had the opportunity to do some passive traffic analysis on
one of the California POPs for a major DSL provider. Just under a /14
of addresses was routed to this POP. That's around a quarter million
addresses. The grand total number of unique addresses observed sending
traffic this March? Less than 6000.

That's the -reality- of address assignment at the mega-ISPs, and if
it's even within an order of magnitude of typical then we have decades
of addresses available for IPv4 just by recovering the waste.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004