Don't you mean out of ~4,000,000,000 ? [4,294,967,296] ? On Sun, Jun 21, 2026 at 6:33 PM Gary Sparkes <[email protected]> wrote:
> Honestly, I'm surprised this hasn't been proposed or being worked on yet, > because at some point (probably in my lifetime) it may become necessary. > Though, AFAIK, we're still sub 500,000 for issued ASN range, out of the > 4,000,000 so possible. > > But hobby ASNs and other usages are on the rise..... in some communities I > see a lot of requests for help getting set up there, and most of those > users are v6 only for obvious reasons.... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dorn Hetzel via NANOG <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2026 8:29 PM > To: North American Network Operators Group <[email protected]> > Cc: Arie Vayner <[email protected]>; Dorn Hetzel <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: IPv4 flag day > > Sure, have every hotdog cart run BGP, pretty soon we'll need 64 bit AS > numbers :) > > > On Sun, Jun 21, 2026 at 6:29 PM Mike Hammett via NANOG < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > Most pizza shops aren't going to be able to manage BGP. > > > > > > > > ----- > > Mike Hammett > > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > > > Midwest Internet Exchange > > > > The Brothers WISP > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "sronan--- via NANOG" <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Cc: "Arie Vayner" <[email protected]>, [email protected], > > [email protected] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2026 4:24:25 PM > > Subject: Re: IPv4 flag day > > > > Sorry, but this is NOT a significant use case, and I wouldn’t buy > > service from any Internet provider who doesn’t support BGP. > > > > But frankly you could implement this exact same solution with IPv6 > > without BGP anyway. > > > > Shane > > > > > On Jun 16, 2026, at 5:21 PM, Arie Vayner via NANOG < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > There is also a significant set of use cases that currently work > > > better, > > or > > > at least more easily, with NAT. > > > > > > The most common example is small branch sites with dual ISP uplinks. > > There > > > are a vast number of these sites deployed using two small > > provider-assigned > > > (PA) NAT pools. This setup is widely understood, simple to > > > implement, and reliable. > > > > > > Moving these sites to IPv6 via BGP is often not feasible. Many ISP > > circuits > > > do not support BGP, and the teams operating these sites lack the > > > time to navigate that complexity. Furthermore, other IPv6 > > > dual-homing options > > often > > > don't align with enterprise requirements or expected complexity (or > > really > > > simplicity) levels. > > > > > > In my view, this is a core reason why IPv6 adoption remains low in > > > the enterprise space: it requires fundamental paradigm shifts rather > > > than a simple protocol update. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Arie > > > > > > > > >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2026, 8:10 AM Tom Beecher via NANOG < > > [email protected]> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>>> > > >>> Is NAT still such a severe problem that we needed a different > protocol? > > >>> Ask 1000 NANOG engineers, get 1000 different answers. In practice, > no. > > >>> IPv4 still works. > > >> > > >> > > >> There are also plenty of well established things that NAT causes > > problems > > >> for, along with less than desirable protocol and standardization > > >> choices that have been made because of the existence of NAT. > > >> > > >> We've gotten really good at engineering ways to disguise these > > >> issues so users don't notice them. On one had that's good because > > >> user/application experiences are better, on the other hand it sucks > > >> because people think > > a > > >> non-visible problem isn't a problem anymore. > > >> > > >> On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 10:53 AM Brian Knight via NANOG < > > >> [email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > >>> On 2026-06-16 01:33, Saku Ytti via NANOG wrote: > > >>>> Does anyone feel responsibility for the dual stack mess we've > created? > > >>>> It wasn't here when we found the Internet, and we're going to > > >>>> leave it here after we leave, does not really jive with the whole > > >>>> leave campground cleaner than found it ethos. > > >>> > > >>> It was the most comprehensive solution for the NAT problem. But > > >>> NAT became the accepted way we connect to the Internet. > > >>> > > >>> World + dog knows how to connect to it, troubleshoot it, look at > > >>> NAT tables on their edge firewall or router. > > >>> > > >>> Is NAT still such a severe problem that we needed a different > protocol? > > >>> Ask 1000 NANOG engineers, get 1000 different answers. In practice, > no. > > >>> IPv4 still works. > > >>> > > >>> Economics are a slightly different story, but so far, IPv4 space > > >>> isn't prohibitively expensive. > > >>> > > >>> -Brian > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> NANOG mailing list > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/QE > > OMV5GN4WLNYOH7QZWYP5E26ZJ5AO57/ > > >>> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> NANOG mailing list > > >> > > >> > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/AB > > XC2CERUCF64YKCK5YXOJTLPRJSTPBV/ > > > _______________________________________________ > > > NANOG mailing list > > > > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/BZ > > 6LKHSDLZ3WOR4GW2B544OKLSHFBIIG/ > > _______________________________________________ > > NANOG mailing list > > > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/HZ > > LJOUK3CNBHHHS2KLRVNETDA3U7DNCZ/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > NANOG mailing list > > > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/W3 > > CJ2XL3YV6T5CI2HUOHBMZITT6NH22A/ > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/EQX7WFQ5NGNZ5FEOFU5RZPNSTDWOU27Y/ > _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/LYTYOEEBMSKIIK7DZLZQKSVDTH33PFS7/
