[arin-ppml] ARIN-prop-127: Shared Transition Space for IPv4 Address Extension

[Owen DeLong]

On Jan 22, 2011, at 9:58 AM, Jack Bates wrote:

> On 1/22/2011 10:36 AM, Frank Bulk wrote:
>> FB> Yes, there will be service providers who do just as you described, but
>> we shouldn't penalize all those who can't currently justify additional
>> requests, anticipate future growth, acknowledge that NAT444 is the
>> transition technology they need, and need a path moving forward.
>> 
> 
> I'm not saying penalize. I'm saying that we either don't support the /10 and make the eyeballs retask their existing IPv4 address space (which will still free up some of their address space, just not as much as if we gave them the /10), or the policy must MANDATE that all NAT444 justifications must utilize the /10. This differs from RFC-1918, in that it specifically tasks the /10 to a purpose and mandates that it be used for said purpose when people justify for IPv4 space.
> 
I'm pretty sure that instead of retasking their existing IPv4 space (which won't free up so much address space as you think, it will just increase the number of users they are forced to put behind NAT444), it will cause them to individually get space from ARIN for this purpose.

While I don't think any of them will be able to get a /10 for this purpose, I'm pretty sure that the total aggregate of what they will be able to get will greatly exceed a /10.

> The policy should not be wide open with an optional /10 which will be tasked with serving a purpose, but people can just ignore that purpose as well. This would leave a new opening for abuse.
> 
Since this would be a block that noone in their right mind would accept a route for from any of their peers, what kind of abuse are you expecting it to be open to? Are you saying that there is significant abuse of RFC-1918 addresses today?

>> FB>  I hope that you can avoid NAT444.  I'm hoping to, too.  In the words of
>> Randy Bush, I encourage my competitors to pursue NAT444.
>> 
> 
> Benefits of being a small ISP. I have a lot of flexibility. Benefits of being  the only provider in many areas, I have a lot of flexibility and no Randy's encouraging me. The first place I expect to see NAT44, and it generally will not be NAT444 though still subject to upnp breaking, is on modem banks (yes, there are still vast pools of modem bank IP addresses and even people that dial into them). Due to the limitation of connectivity, modem bank users utilize a subset of protocols which NAT444 breaks. It will, however, free up vast amounts of space.
> 
There are not a lot of networks still supporting dial up. There may still be  lot of modem banks with users, but, they are in a relatively small number of networks.

Owen