No post body was provided.
Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
11–20 of 208 posts
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#12> over 16% of all of the non-RFC1918 space is suspected squatted DoD space!
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not really what the author was getting at. The VPC endpoints just provide a way (via TLS certificate authority logs) for the author to discover DNS addresses that they can then use to check for queries and determine what IP addresses are being used in private networks. They found a number of AWS users that are treating publicly routable IP space as their own private IP space. If someone were to ever offer a pu…
I agree with you in general. If you do expect to be able to connect to the public internet and map an endpoint over a public address you are aiming a gun at your foot. However the point I was trying to make was about this quote: > This is useful since it can remove the need for some servers to have any outbound internet access at all. My point is that if you are not connected to the public internet at all I don't see…
For what it's worth, I've these endpoints in use for VPCs that still had internet access. Meaning that if you attempted to read the "real" internet address you put your VPC subnet on, they would be unreachable.
It's hard/impossible to figure out if the VPC in question has been setup this way. But I agree that it would be likely that most of these VPC with the endpoints on don't have internet access.
However if we assume (dangerously I suppose) that the VPC subnet distribution is similar to other VPCs without private link, we can imagine how many other VPCs are squatting on space that do have internet access!
(Assuming any of this makes sense)
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#14About 10 years ago, IBM used to use the 9.0.0.0/8 space in basically exactly the same way as one would use 10.0.0.0/8, for internal-only networking. Each workstation got its own 9.x.x.x IP, but it wasn't routable from outside.
I hope they stopped doing that, but I doubt it.
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#15Artificial scarcity is best scarcity.
Certain popular western european ISP still gives IPv4s cheaper than IPv6s (still a high price, though).
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#16There is still plenty of IPv4 space available, it's just very badly distributed, for instance, due to early limits in Cisco's IOS, Chevron acquired an insane 26 Class B address blocks when connecting to the net back in the early 90s! With CIDR, we can easily reuse the many unused addrs like those, but the pain of readdressing has their owners sitting on them, raising prices and making them even more reluctant to turn loose of any for fear they won't be able to get them back...
And, let's face it, IPv6 addressing is so fundamentally horked-up that it's practically only usable by propellerheads in the cloud backend: First, the addresses are too damn long and unwieldy to really be used; and second, even most people reading this, tech people in a tech forum, struggle to really grasp the inane IPv6 address shortening rules! Like X.400 mail addresses, they work technically, but are unusable in practice.
(For those of you fortunate enough not to remember, the best way to get and transfer someone's X.400 address, even within the X.400 network, was to have them mail someone through an internet gateway and use whatever it said. Marshall Rose devoted an entire chapter to ranting about this in his Internet Mail book...)
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#17Blackrock.
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#18About 10 years ago, IBM used to use the 9.0.0.0/8 space in basically exactly the same way as one would use 10.0.0.0/8, for internal-only networking. Each workstation got its own 9.x.x.x IP, but it wasn't routable from outside. I hope they stopped doing that, but I doubt it.
About 5 years ago that was still a thing!
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#19IPv4 address space is in short supply, so some people decide to use IP space ( allocated, but not advertised) that doesn't belong to them. The consequences are pretty well described in the article you quote.
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes I didn’t understand this as squatting and made me question if I understood the post. As it is a topic I admit to not being too deeply knowledgeable about.
I think in general the author's definition of squatting is reasonable. I see it to mean "living on land you don't own" or more directly "using IP addresses that you don't own". My point is about fully private networks that aren't connected to the internet. I would argue that in this case you do own all of the addresses, even if someone else owns them on the public internet.
That's like saying if I create a 3D model of my neighbour's car and drive it around the streets of a videogame I am "squatting my neighbour's car" or "using a car I don't own".