Time to go around to Fortune 100 companies and say "use it or lose it".
We're about to hit phase 3 of ARIN IPV4 rationing
11–20 of 116 posts
Re: We're about to hit phase 3 of ARIN IPV4 rationing
#12There are a ton of /8 still assigned to companies that don't need them. Ford, GE, IBM, AT&T (x2), Xerox, HP (x2), Apple, MIT, CSC, Eli Lilly, Nortel, Prudential Insurance, DuPont, Cap Debis, Merck, SITA. All of those can return their /8. That's 18 /8 potentially available. And does the DoD really need 12 /8's? I get that they want to network every person, gun, ship, tank, truck and plane. But none of those need to be…
Can those companies sell their IPs on the open market when the normal pool has run out? Is that allowed?
Re: We're about to hit phase 3 of ARIN IPV4 rationing
#13There are a ton of /8 still assigned to companies that don't need them. Ford, GE, IBM, AT&T (x2), Xerox, HP (x2), Apple, MIT, CSC, Eli Lilly, Nortel, Prudential Insurance, DuPont, Cap Debis, Merck, SITA. All of those can return their /8. That's 18 /8 potentially available. And does the DoD really need 12 /8's? I get that they want to network every person, gun, ship, tank, truck and plane. But none of those need to be…
> All of those can return their /8. That's 18 /8 potentially available. If say, Apple is using at least a little bit of that /8 here and there (safe assumption, no?) its going to be hard for them to return it. I'd wager corporations that have /8s have policies that rely on the assumption that they have the whole /8. So I wouldn't hold my breath on getting one back from them.
Right. How much code is out there that looks like
if(recv.ip.contains("2.") {
//well we know that they're from X co.
}Re: We're about to hit phase 3 of ARIN IPV4 rationing
#14Unless I'm misreading it. The rationing rules in effect during Phase 3 are exactly the same as Phase 2. So why the distinction at all?
There is now a 60 day payment window that wasn't there before. And a review of previous procedures that could result in various minor revisions. So it is different, but not a lot different.
Re: We're about to hit phase 3 of ARIN IPV4 rationing
#15Time to go around to Fortune 100 companies and say "use it or lose it".
Recovering additional IPv4 space at this point only prolongs the inevitable problem. The solution is IPv6.
Re: We're about to hit phase 3 of ARIN IPV4 rationing
#16Some good information on this from Geoff Huston: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-08/EndPt2.html
Re: We're about to hit phase 3 of ARIN IPV4 rationing
#17And news.ycombinator.com is still IPv4-only.
Re: We're about to hit phase 3 of ARIN IPV4 rationing
#18There are a ton of /8 still assigned to companies that don't need them. Ford, GE, IBM, AT&T (x2), Xerox, HP (x2), Apple, MIT, CSC, Eli Lilly, Nortel, Prudential Insurance, DuPont, Cap Debis, Merck, SITA. All of those can return their /8. That's 18 /8 potentially available. And does the DoD really need 12 /8's? I get that they want to network every person, gun, ship, tank, truck and plane. But none of those need to be…
Returning them would only delay the inevitable by a matter of months. Deploy IPv6 today, it ain't hard.
How would end-user software deal with an IPv6 address though? Surely some of it is IPv6 capable already, but I would imagine that a lot of it makes assumptions about IPv4. If the OS were operating on a IPv6 network, would that software function correctly as long as the addresses were IPv4-compatible (i.e. within the IPv4 range, and not in IPv6 notation)?
Re: We're about to hit phase 3 of ARIN IPV4 rationing
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
Returning them would only delay the inevitable by a matter of months. Deploy IPv6 today, it ain't hard.
How would end-user software deal with an IPv6 address though? Surely some of it is IPv6 capable already, but I would imagine that a lot of it makes assumptions about IPv4. If the OS were operating on a IPv6 network, would that software function correctly as long as the addresses were IPv4-compatible (i.e. within the IPv4 range, and not in IPv6 notation)?
You can run both at the same time. Any software that is not IPv6 compatible would still be able to connect through IPv4 and just not have access to IPv6 addresses.
The bigger issue would be connecting to IPv6 only servers from an IPv4 program. The first question is how many IPv4 only programs exist in the wild. If you happen to have one, and cannot update it, then you still have the option of creating an IPv4 to IPv6 proxy for the specific site(s) you need.
Re: We're about to hit phase 3 of ARIN IPV4 rationing
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
Returning them would only delay the inevitable by a matter of months. Deploy IPv6 today, it ain't hard.
How would end-user software deal with an IPv6 address though? Surely some of it is IPv6 capable already, but I would imagine that a lot of it makes assumptions about IPv4. If the OS were operating on a IPv6 network, would that software function correctly as long as the addresses were IPv4-compatible (i.e. within the IPv4 range, and not in IPv6 notation)?
"It depends", is unfortunately the answer. For very old software where it's not possible to patch it for IPv6 support (this is rarer than you might think!) then some kind of IPv4 NAT or a DNS64 style "application layer gateway" is required.
You could also potentially add a specific wrapper for your application e.g. wrapping MySQL connections inside of stunnel allows them to run over IPv6 in version of MySQL built with v6 support, or for simple daemons you can do things like set up socat to proxy between an IPv4 socket and an IPv6 socket.
Almost no software you're likely to be running is incompatible with IPv6, though. Software support for IPv6 is way ahead of actual network implementation.