North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: [NANOG] fair warning: less than 1000 days left to IPv4

  • From: Joel Jaeggli
  • Date: Sun May 04 15:13:11 2008

Tomas L. Byrnes wrote:

> IPv4 has enough addresses for every computer on Earth, and then some.

There are approximately 3.4 billion or a little less usable ip 
addresses. there are 3.3 billion mobile phone users buying approximately 
400,000 ip capable devices a day. That's a single industy, 
notwithstanding how the are presently employed what do you think those 
deployments are going to look like in 5 years? in 10?

How many ip addresses do you need to nat 100 million customers? how much 
state do you have to carry to do port demux for their traffic?

I guess making it all scale is someone else's problem...

> That having been said, I think going to IPv6 has a lot of other benefits
> that make it worthwhile.
> YMMV, IANAL, yadda yadda yadda
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Paul Vixie [mailto:[email protected]] 
>> Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2008 9:39 AM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [NANOG] fair warning: less than 1000 days left to IPv4
>> [email protected] (Nathan Ward) writes:
>>>> That also doesn't take into account how many /8's are 
>> being hoarded 
>>>> by organizations that don't need even 25% of that space.
>>> Unless you're expecting those organisations to be really 
>> nice and make 
>>> that address space available to other organisations (ie. their RIR/ 
>>> LIR, or the highest bidder on ebay), ...
>> first, a parable:
>> in datacenters, it used to be that the scarce resource was 
>> rack space, but then it was connectivity, and now it's 
>> power/heat/cooling.  there are fallow fields of empty racks 
>> too far from fiber routes or power grids to be filled, all 
>> because the scarcity selector has moved over time.  some 
>> folks who were previously close to fiber routes and/or power 
>> grids found that they could do greenfield construction and 
>> that the customers would naturally move in, since too much 
>> older datacenter capacity was unusable by modern standards.
>> then, a recounting:
>> michael dillon asked a while back what could happen if MIT 
>> (holding 18/8) were to go into the ISP business, offering 
>> dialup and/or tunnel/VPN access, and bundling a /24 with each 
>> connection, and allowing each customer to multihome if they 
>> so chose.  nobody could think of an RIR rule, or an ISP rule, 
>> or indeed anything else that could prevent this from 
>> occurring.  now, i don't think that MIT would do this, since 
>> it would be a distraction for them, and they probably don't 
>> need the money, and they're good guys, anyway.
>> now, a prediction:
>> but if the bottom feeding scumsuckers who saw the opportunity 
>> now known as spam, or the ones who saw the opportunity now 
>> known as NXDOMAIN remapping, or the ones who saw the 
>> opportunity now known as DDoS for hire, realize that the next 
>> great weakness in the internet's design and protocols is 
>> explosive deaggregation by virtual shill networking, then we 
>> can expect business plans whereby well suited shysters march 
>> into MIT, and HP, and so on, offering to outsource this 
>> monetization.  "you get half the money but none of the 
>> distraction, all you have to do is renumber or use NAT or 
>> IPv6, we'll do the rest."  nothing in recorded human history 
>> argues against this occurring.
>> --
>> Paul Vixie
>> _______________________________________________
>> NANOG mailing list
>> [email protected]
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
> [email protected]

NANOG mailing list
[email protected]