My apologies for expressing myself poorly.
What I meant to say is that this is primarily a problem caused by Sony and the
Sonys of the world. Less so a problem inherent to IPv4. A root cause fix would
address Sony's hostile behavior.
- Jared
Jordi Palet wrote:
No, isn't only a Sony problem, becomes a problem for every ISP that has
customers using Sony PSN and have CGN (NAT444), their IP blocks are
black-listed when they are detected as used CGN. This blocking is "forever"
(I'm not aware of anyone that has been able to convince PSN to unblock them).
Then the ISP will rotate the addresses that are in the CGN (which means some
work renumbering other parts of the network).
You do this with all your IPv4 blocks, and at some point, you don't have any
"not black-listed" block. Then you need to transfer more addresses.
So realistically, in many cases, for residential ISPs it makes a lot of sense
to analyze if you have a relevant number of customers using PSN and make your
numbers about if it makes sense or not to buy CGN vs transfer IPv4 addresses vs
the real long term solution, which is IPv6 even if you need to invest in
replacing the customer CPEs.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 30/3/22, 21:02, "NANOG en nombre de Jared Brown"
<nanog-bounces+jordi.palet=consulintel.es at nanog.org en nombre de nanog-isp
at mail.com> escribió:
Not to necessarily disagree with you, but that is more of a Sony problem
than an IPv4 problem.
- Jared
Jordi Palet wrote:
It is not a fixed one-time cost ... because if your users are gamers behind
PSP, Sony is blocking IPv4 ranges behind CGN. So, you keep rotating your
addresses until all then are blocked, then you need to transfer more IPv4
addresses ...
So under this perspective, in many cases it makes more sense to NOT invest
in CGN, and use that money to transfer up-front more IPv4 addresses at once,
you will get a better price than if you transfer them every few months.
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
El 30/3/22, 18:38, "NANOG en nombre de Jared Brown"
<nanog-bounces+jordi.palet=consulintel.es at nanog.org en nombre de nanog-isp
at mail.com> escribió:
Randy Carpenter wrote:
> >> >> Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote:
> >> >> When your ISP starts charging $X/Month for legacy protocol
support
> >> >
> >> > Out of interest, how would this come about?
> >>
> >> ISPs are facing ever growing costs to continue providing IPv4
services.
> > Could you please be more specific about which costs you are
referring to?
> >
> > It's not like IP transit providers care if they deliver IPv4 or
IPv6 bits to
> > you.
>
> Have you priced blocks of IPv4 addresses lately?
IPv4 address blocks have a fixed one-time cost, not an ongoing
$X/month cost.
- Jared
