Suriya- Just so it is clear, the technology that Abraham is referencing ( EZIP ) is ONLY a proposal that has been made. It has not been accepted by any standards body. It is not implemented or supported by any major router vendor. It will not work for you. On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 11:41 AM Abraham Y. Chen via NANOG < nanog@lists.nanog.org> wrote:
Hi, Suriya:
0) I am glad that you requested off-list follow-ups, because what I am going to share is quite controversial. With a general distribution list, a discussion can easily be pulled off the track by personal / emotional opinions or business interests, as you might have noticed on the NANOG Forum in the past.
1) I would recommend you to consider replacing 100.64/10 netblock with 240/4 netblock for the CG-NAT configuration. This will reduce your need for IPv4 addresses by 64 fold, thus mitigating the IPv4 address shortage that you are facing.
2) Although there have been (and still are) various attempts to make use of the 240/4 netblock, none has approached it in a universal sense as our proposal, called EzIP (phonetic for Easy IPv4). Others are either piecemeal solutions for special cases or limited scope applications. They will fragment the Internet and lead to chaos. Characterized by Vint Cerf as an "Overlay Network", EzIP scheme forms a new layer of communication infrastructure that is independent of, yet in arm's-length with the current Internet core. So that, EzIP can retain the desired properties of the existing Internet, while shaking off the handicaps. The former maintains the operation characteristics as CG-NAT to avoid perturbing users, while the latter enables the Internet revamping into a new era. This far-reaching implication is possible because EzIP resolves the most fundamental issue of user identification resources. From such, many constraints are either relaxed or simply removed.
3) For a general introduction, please have a look at the below pair of documents.
https://avinta.com/gallery/DeterministicInternetIntro-US.pdf
https://avinta.com/gallery/DeterministicInternet-SPKR.pdf
4) Since this topic touches many aspects of the Internet and we are not an operatorbut just a system analyst, we likely have not covered many aspects that hands-on parties like you are familiar with. Please browse through our website to see other background information which may be relevant, then let us know your concerns. So that we can evaluate them for you.
Regards,
Abe (2025-05-06 11:40 EDT) VP Engineering Avinta Communications, Inc. Milpitas, CA 95035 USA O: +1(408)942-1485x66 M: +1(650)248-1829 Teams: Abraham.Y.Chen eMail: AYChen@Avinta.com WebSite: www.Avinta.com
On 2025-05-06 04:36, Suriya Kamon via NANOG wrote:
Hi NANOG,
We are running short of IPv4 addresses.
We are a small ISP and longer prefixes are okay with us (even /24s).
Please contact me off-list.
(Proper ROA coverage is a must).
Thanks.
Best Regards, Suriya _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/3MYN3WEG...
-- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog@lists.nanog.org/message/LTKZLWUS...