US Department of Defense has 14 /8 blocks. You'd have to wonder what they do with that large number of public IPs. Sure, some companies have large blocks but that's nothing compared to that.
Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
131–140 of 208 posts
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#132Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would that be relevant here (or sibling comment about Apple)? Last I checked except for 9.9.9.0/24 (to quad9) IBM is indeed the assignee for 9.0.0.0/8 from back in 1992. Apple got 17.0.0.0/8 back in 1990. Back in the day a lot of big entities got whole /8 blocks (including of course a lot of the USG but private corps as well). Many of them are still around and fully active, while others are defunct (Halliburton h…
> Why would that be relevant here Because it shows how wasteful these companies operate with resources others are in need of.
There are only ~4 billion IPv4 addresses. There are more than that many humans alive, most of whom have or will have a smartphone. So we're already short on addresses without considering network equipment, servers, IoT, or anything else.
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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! Ever heard of DNS?
I don't know about everyone else, but when I want to go to Hacker News I go to https://209.216.230.240 and ignore the security warnings of mismatched name. Way easier to remember than news.ycombinator.com, its five fewer characters!
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#134Artificial 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?
#135About 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?
#136Would stop a lot of squatting on unused space and free it up.
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#137About 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.
IBM owned 9/8 so this is a legitimate use of address space. All hosts should have globally unique addresses, even if you want to use NAT to hide various things. IBM does multiple acquisitions per year. Imagine merging two corporate networks that both use 10/8; it's a nightmare.
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#138I don't understand why was the next version of IP not just identical to IPv4 but with more bits in address space? Were they trying to do too many things at once in the 90's?
For example, ipv4 technically has a link-local address space but barely anything will use it and even less will successfully. Many other 80/90s protocols did much better at that (IPX being an example) as well as having distributed name and service locators and such.
IPv6 local networks of IoT devices or whatever can pretty much automagically start communicating with zero configuration to anything else locally. No DHCP or whatever required.
The world didn't stand still between v4 and v6, it'd be weird if the protocol did.
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
I applied in October last year, and at that time the waiting list was zero days, so I received our /24 instantaneously. Some nice data on the prices of IPv4 addresses: https://auctions.ipv4.global/prior-sales
Should change to a montly fee. Then people would get rid of the ones not used.
There is a fee. Your EUR 1,400 annual fee.
For that money you get one IPv4 and one IPv6 (IPv4 subject to availability, obvs!).
Above that they charge per resource assignment, 50EUR per annum per resource assignment ( defined as: "IPv4 and IPv6 PI assignments; Anycast assignments; IPv4 and IPv6 IXP assignments; and Legacy IPv4 resource registrations through a sponsoring LIR. AS Numbers are excluded from this charge")
And yes, I think the 50EUR should be put on a ladder scale so hoarders get charged exponentially more. ;-)
Re: Who is squatting IPv4 addresses?
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
IBM owned 9/8 so this is a legitimate use of address space. All hosts should have globally unique addresses, even if you want to use NAT to hide various things. IBM does multiple acquisitions per year. Imagine merging two corporate networks that both use 10/8; it's a nightmare.
The acquisition's IPs might not conflict with IBMs, but surely they conflict with those of the other acquisitions? Is there any benefit after the first acquisition?