It's a finite resource. And now it has run out. We've know this for years, and very little has been done, relative to what could have been done.
Now, the end is *nigh*. Or, rather, *here*. The end is here. What's a reprieve or 1 or two years going to get us? The same bellyaching in 1 or 2 years, as vendors will not move on this until forced. Now they are. *ASB *(Find me online via About.Me <http://about.me/Andrew.S.Baker/bio>) *Exploiting Technology for Business Advantage... * On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 5:51 PM, James Hill <[email protected]>wrote: > Thanks Scott. I certainly understand your point. My thoughts were that the > unused addresses would only be available to ISP 1. > > > > Not disagreeing that there has been structure behind the allocations either > just that it wasn’t as perhaps controlled as it could have been. > > > > *From:* Crawford, Scott [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Tuesday, 8 February 2011 8:13 AM > > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: [semi-OT] Last IPv4 address blocks assigned > > > > I only skim the NANOG (North American Network Operators Group) list so this > may or may not be helpful. > > > > It seems one of the big problems is the memory required to store routing > tables in big routers. Assume you have ISP1 with the addresses 1.1.0.0/16or > 65K addresses that they allocate among their subscribers. The rest of the > internet can route all of their traffic to them with one route statement. > Now, assume that they subnet that out to 256 companies that have 256 > addresses each. If it turns out that one of those companies only needs 1 > address, they’re wasting 255. BUT, the only people they can feasibly give > them to are other companies served by ISP1. If they were to try and assign > the unused addresses to a customer on ISP2, the rest of the internet would > have to add a new route for that specific customer. If every ISP did that, > we’d double the size of the routing tables. > > > > It’s not like there’s 4 billion addresses that are being doled out in a > haphazard and we can just throw a few back in the bucket. There’s an attempt > to aggregate them to geographically close locations. > > > > I’m sure I’ve glossed over a lot of details, and I realize some of the math > is a “bit” off, but I hope you get my point. > > > > *From:* James Hill [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Monday, February 07, 2011 3:54 PM > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* RE: [semi-OT] Last IPv4 address blocks assigned > > > > >> And what do you propose happen with the rest of the traffic that these > organizations send to each other? > > > > They have multiple external addresses, so some can be Nat’d and some not. > Sheesh, why is this so damn hard? And don’t use “scale” as an excuse. > Bigger shops have more technical people, they have bigger budgets etc. > > > >> So, you're sure that IPv6 is unsuitable in a majority of situations for > most organizations, but you're equally sure that conveniently unnamed > commercial devices are able to handle the level of traffic required for > large organizations and universities? > > > > I never said it is unsuitable in a majority of situations, where did you > get that from? IPV6 is essential there is no question about that. > > ISP’s and the backbone providers handle more traffic than universities > surely? So yes I think it’s fair that devices exist that handle the level > of traffic. . For example, Telstra is Australia’s largest ISP and > telephony provider. Customers who have a mobile data plan do not receive a > public IP, they are issued with a private IP. They would have hundreds of > thousands of customers on this part of their network so there is obviously > some equipment managing this task. I don’t **know** what devices they are > using so I can’t name them, but they are obviously using something capable. > > > > >> Are you sure that you actually understand the nuances of the issues > being discussed? > > > > Yes I believe I do. > > > > >> By whose account is it *excessive* ? Do you want someone coming and > telling you that something that you went out and obtained legitimately must > be taken away in order to be fair to someone else who wasn't even around at > that time? > > > > If a resource is limited and there are those who have excessive amounts > (the figures already mentioned in this topic show that they are excessive, > they have so many spare that they are wondering if they can sell some) then > yes taking some back may be an option. We’ve seen this in other spaces, > power and water for example and many would argue that internet is just as > critical these days(even though I personally think that’s a bit crazy). > > > > >> How should they manifest this caring spirit that you feel they don't > have? By giving up addresses to whom? > > > > You can’t be serious? Hand them back to ever allocated them in the first > place so that they can then be allocated to whoever needs them. > > > > >> Can you even articulate who it is that is in need of these addresses > but can't get them? > > > > How is this also not blindingly obvious? ANYONE that needs an address. > > > > At the end of the day IPV6 is the answer. I’m not disagreeing with that in > any shape or form. What I’ve been trying to convey is that the IPV4 space > could have lasted longer. That there are organisations that have far more > than they ever needed and that this has impacted other organisations > unfairly imo over the last few years. > > > > James. > > > * * > > > > On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 1:05 AM, James Hill <[email protected]> > wrote: > > NAT doesn't work for all things. > > > No of course not but that's not an excuse for it to not be used. Surely > it can be used for the majority of traffic? > > > Universities also have the type of applications that simply exceeded the > capabilities of most commercial network devices. When I worked at a Uni, > AARNET was already in the gbps speed, and that was quite a while ago. > > > I highly doubt that there aren't commercial devices that can handle this > now and for the last several years. ISP's had to be using something all > these years. > > > Because they don't have to. You're not any more entitled to the space as > the next person. > > > This is the REAL issue. They don't have to so they don't care. They > were allocated excessive IP's and so they never had to design their networks > in any other manner. > > > IPV6 may have been around for a long time but it wasn't suitable for use > 10 years ago or even now in some cases. > > > Because it wasn't the standard and everything that goes along with that. > Apps, operating systems etc that just didn't support it and some that still > don't. If it was the way to go why didn't uni's implement it solely 10 > years ago? > > > Lastly, a Class C is only 256 addresses. In Australia (I used to work at > UNSW), we have Unis that have 10,000+ staff, and 30,000+ students. That's > bigger than most companies, and most ISPs. A Class C (256 addresses) would > simply be way too small for that type of organisation. FWIW we had two Class > Bs. > > > I'm not denying that it isn't a big network and that there isn't a > requirement for more public IP's. But even then not all of those staff and > students are active on the network at the same time. It's also clear (as > per Jack's email) that many of the public IP's are NOT in use. > > > Huh? What are you talking about. This isn't a problem for the Uni. It's a > problem for the majors at peering points. CIDR (for example) doesn't work > unless there's a hierarchical address space. > > > You'll need to explain where you are coming from on this one before I can > comment. In particular who you regard as majors/peering points. > > > James. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ken Schaefer [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Monday, 7 February 2011 2:38 PM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: [semi-OT] Last IPv4 address blocks assigned > > NAT uses ports - there's a limit of about 65,000 of those per NAT device. > > And why should Universities have to configure NAT? We've had IPv6 for 10+ > years now. Maybe people should get around to migrating. Getting some IP > address space back from a Uni is going to postpone the problem by a day or > two at most. > > And lastly, there's the complexity of routing. You can't just take random > bits of address space hacked out from existing netblocks and efficiently put > them into routing tables. > > Cheers > Ken > > -----Original Message----- > From: James Hill [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Monday, 7 February 2011 11:30 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: [semi-OT] Last IPv4 address blocks assigned > > It's always amazed me that universities don't seem to know how to configure > NAT. If all of the uni's and big businesses that have ridiculous amount of > public ip's learned how to use NAT then the V4 space would have lasted > longer. It would have been easier for organisations that actually needed > more public IP's to get them too over the last few years. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kramer, Jack [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, 5 February 2011 1:20 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: [semi-OT] Last IPv4 address blocks assigned > > Ouch! I would say at least 30,000 to 40,000 user machines plus things like > servers, HPCC farms, appliances, and VMs. We have a student population of > about 47,000 plus about 11,000 staff, though not all of those users are on > campus at any given moment. There's no NAT on campus so unless you set up a > NAT device yourself you're going to get a public IP. Our dormitory > population is about 18,000 - each of those machines receives an IP from the > dormitory DHCP range, which is protected by the campus border firewall/IPS. > Wireless machines also receive externally facing IPs but are shielded by the > border systems as well. (And, of course, lots of students have wireless > laptops or things like iPods, etc.) Staff machines can either be DHCP or > static; static addresses are publicly accessible by default while DHCP > ranges are protected by the border unless requested otherwise. Obviously not > every student is online at any given moment, but their IP reservations are > protected by the campus DHCP servers for something like 3 months from last > activity - just long enough that you have to get a new reservation when you > come back from summer break. > > The campus backbone network is where things get interesting - we've just > been upgraded to 10Gb for building interconnects with most buildings at 1Gb > internal networking and our fibre network extends into some areas of > downtown Lansing (the local hospital, for instance) as well as to some of > our satellite sites around the state. It's a big network, even if my little > departmental piece of it isn't so vast. > > ---- > Jack Kramer > Computer Systems Specialist > University Relations, Michigan State University > w: 517-884-1231 / c: 248-635-4955 > > > > > On 2/4/11 9:57 AM, "Martin Blackstone" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >50 > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Crawford, Scott [mailto:[email protected]] > >Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 6:55 AM > >To: NT System Admin Issues > >Subject: RE: [semi-OT] Last IPv4 address blocks assigned > > > >out of curiosity, how many computers does that serve? > > > >________________________________________ > >From: Kramer, Jack [[email protected]] > >Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 8:13 AM > >To: NT System Admin Issues > >Subject: Re: [semi-OT] Last IPv4 address blocks assigned > > > >The nice thing about being at a public university - 520,000 IP addresses. > >(Michigan State has 35.8 through 35.15.) I wonder if we can sell them? > >It'd help make up for state budget cuts. > > > >---- > >Jack Kramer > >Computer Systems Specialist > >University Relations, Michigan State University > >w: 517-884-1231 / c: 248-635-4955 > > > > > > > > > >On 2/3/11 5:43 PM, "Ben Scott" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> It's official. Today (Thr 3 Feb 2010), IANA delegated the last free > >>IPv4 address blocks to the Regional Internet Registries. There are no > >>free blocks left. > >> > >>http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/02/river-of-ipv4-addresse > >>s > >>-of > >>ficially-runs-dry.ars > >> > >> It will doubtless take a little time for those blocks to trickle > >>down to actual network operators. And, of course, just because > >>address space is assigned doesn't mean it's used; some "idle" blocks > >>may be released or even sold. > >> > >> But any which way you slice it, the writing on the wall is clear: > >>Getting public IPv4 addresses is going to become increasingly > >>difficult. > >> > >> Welcome to IPv6. Hope you brought your helmet. > >> > >>-- Ben > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: > http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to [email protected] > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: > http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to [email protected] > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: > http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to [email protected] > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: > http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to [email protected] > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to [email protected] with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
