[arin-ppml] quantitative study of IPv4 address market

Benson Schliesser bensons at queuefull.net
Thu Sep 6 22:09:23 EDT 2012

Hi, Milton.

I cannot speak about MSFT's specific situation. But I'm familiar with 
several networks that require globally-unique addresses and are not 
routed on the public Internet. In general, these are networks that 
interconnect with multiple organizations but not with the "Internet" 
at-large. (I.e. as *an* internet rather than *the* Internet) Their 
non-public nature doesn't necessarily make them any more able to use 
IPv6, if the networks, applications, etc, of these internets are not 
IPv6 capable.

In the context of datacenter networks, some modern technology 
architectures involve numbering server infrastructure with non-Internet 
routed addresses. (See e.g. the work of the IETF NVO3 working group, 
Microsoft's recent SDN announcements, etc.) If that infrastructure is to 
be interconnected with other organizations' infrastructure, then it 
makes sense to use globally-unique addresses even if they're not routed 
due to security concerns, etc.


On 9/6/12 5:59 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> Like Mike, I find it extraordinary that MSFT would devote 98% of its purchased numbers to these non publicly-routed uses. Maybe 10%, maybe even 20%, but virtually all of them? Strains plausibility. Incidentally, speaking of hosting companies, we found that Amazon immediately put into public routing all the address space they acquired from Merck, and so did all the other hosting companies, in both ARIN and APNIC regions, that we studied. So the MSFT case stands out. I understand why John has to say what he says, of course.
> Another interesting question: if they were really internal, non public uses, could they not be put on IPv6?
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Curran [mailto:jcurran at arin.net]
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 1:37 PM
>> To: Mike Burns
>> Cc: Milton L Mueller; <arin-ppml at arin.net>
>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] quantitative study of IPv4 address market
>> On Sep 5, 2012, at 6:26 PM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com>
>>   wrote:
>>> There are over 17 million RFC 1918 addresses that can be privately used!
>> Not if you don't want horrible conflicts when you acquire or merge in
>> any other organization.
>>> Can anybody speculate on a valid justification for the delivery of 660,000
>> addresses required to be used within a year, with 98% of them to be
>> unrouted?
>> Speak with nearly any hosting organization, particularly given today's
>> unique IP address needs for virtual servers.
>> FYI,
>> /John
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
> _______________________________________________
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list