At 2/7/2011 11:34 AM, Matt wrote: > > No, it's not a real problem. I liken it to the exhaust of > homesteads in the > > past century. You used to be able to go to a land office and ask for your > > 40 acres. Then they ran out. But you could still buy a farm from somebody > > who previously had a homestead. > >Very few are going to give up there 'old' IP space without wanting a >high price if at all. I know I won't, any one else going too? Like >most ISP's we grow every year not shrink. I see this as a real >problem. I imagine we will dual stack soon and when the pinch comes >give lower tier users a NAT'ed IPv4 IP and a /48 or /64 of IPv6 space. > I hate the idea of handing out NAT'ed IP space though. Too hard to >tell who did what. My opinion is there should be a very hard push to >IPv6.
Who says anything about "giving up" old IP space? It's not chattel property. It is merely an identifier in a protocol header, used under a voluntary agreement to exchange traffic. It was given away for free; it can be taken back. The FCC has legal authority over the North American Numbering Plan in the US, which is the *name* space for telephones. Unlike the Internet, it's not voluntary, it's regulated. About a decade ago, they ordered Number Pooling to begin. Carriers who had prefix codes with unused or under-utilized thousands blocks had to return them. Carriers today still have to file semiannual reports on number utilization. Notice how area code splits suddenly slowed to a crawl in the early part of the last decade? Number pooling did it. This was not voluntary. Your unused blocks of numbers were Reclaimed. If IANA or the RIRs wanted to do this, they could. They could simply announce that HP no longer owns Net 16 (old DEC space acquired with Compaq), for instance, effective x date, and HP should stop using it. And Halliburton and Daimler-Benz and other large-block holders should also lose unneeded space and be told to renumber. And then they should ask BGP users to respect the new assignments. Since the Internet is *voluntary*, Uncle Sam has no say; the ISP community decides who is the real owner of the space. The lawyers will, of course, try to find a way to get involved, since IPv4 address blocks *can* now be resold (to qualified buyers), so the large-block owners might see this as taking away windfall profits that they might be able to make by selling those oversized blocks. IAB made their bed, and now they'll have to sleep in it. >Whats bad is 99% percent of consumer wifi routers do not support IPv6. > That is going to be a HUGE issue. A good reason to assume that anything of any interest to the general public will remain on IPv4 for the foreseeable future, and v6-only will be limited to narrow-interest activities. -- Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/ +1 617 795 2701 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
