[arin-ppml] "Millions of Internet Addresses Are Lying Idle" (slashdot)

bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com
Sun Oct 19 18:09:52 EDT 2008

On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 05:21:56PM +0000, Paul Vixie wrote:
> > Johns analysis is based on the premise that nodes respond to an
> > ICMP echo request or the TCP equivalent.  That might temper ones
> > expectations or presumptions about allocated but fallow data.
> > 
> > --bill
> don't shoot the messenger, i found the article relevant since it touched
> on reclaimation policy, even though i found the study itself irrelevant
> since the RIR system and RFC2050 do not require connectedness for "need".
> but it begs an interesting series of questions.  if "need" were redefined
> to include connectedness, how much space would become "unneeded", how long
> would that last in terms of randy's gold brick wall, and what legal regime
> would apply since we can presume that most "unconnected" space is probably
> legacy.  my personal suspicions are that the amount of space that would
> become unneeded could push the brick wall back by more than two years, but
> there's no way to define "connected" since there are so many private
> interconnects between defaultless networks (and it's easy to connect a
> network if it'd mean somebody keeping rights to their ip space).

	connected to whom indeed.
	connected != "in-use"

	second guessing "when" is counter productive.
	for all intents, we are already grappling w/ how
	to deal w/ a steady-state system where we need to be
	able to move IPv4 resources around.  we are in the 
	end-times and for some of us, we have already hit
	the brick wall.  

	even if a couple dozen /8's reenter the playing field,
	we are -never- going to back to status quo (to borrow
	friend bushes phrasology).   like it or not, we are
	in a situation where we have to deal w/ steady state
	in the v4 world.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list