[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-127: Shared Transition Space for IPv4Address Extension

[Koch, Andrew]

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 6:29 PM, George Bonser <gbonser at seven.com> wrote:

> > Again, large quantities of space will be required for NAT444. NAT444 is
> > going to happen. The space used to accomplish this should be coming
> > from a global policy, however, we are out of time for this to work. If
> > we don't do something soon, people will use space inappropriately. This
> > proposal gets providers to use a known /10 we can filter on and
> > implement it correctly / legitimately, the first time. Please give it
> > support.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Aaron
>
>
> There should be ways to reduce the space needed for 444.  If,
> for example, you are a national provider, you could reuse
> that same 444 space in each region.  But I suppose the other
> thing is,  who cares if a provider chooses to use 444, they
> can use their own address space for it.  A small operator
> might get by with a /24 someone else might need a /16.
>
> Seems to me the real goal here is to deploy it in a manner
> where it doesn't actually eat any of the provider's own
> resources.  Making the provider provision it out of their own
> resources might actually keep the implementation down to only
> where it is absolutely necessary.  Creating this global /10
> would, in my opinion, encourage the deployment of it. If it
> is "going to happen anyway", then so be it, it is what it is.
>  But if the providers need to use a chunk of their own space
> for it, it forces an economy in the use of it.

While, it may be possible to eek out CGN space from our existing allocations, this is not efficient use as only my network will be able to this addressing for inevitable CGN, and so on for everyone else's networks.  I know searching out the final crumbs is poor planning, but I see many folks that will need IPv4 space for quite some time - including an increasing number of users requesting static public IP space.  This proposal makes for efficient use of space as it can be reused amongst many networks.

I support this proposal.

Regards,

Andy Koch
TDS Telecom