Dear Eric: 0) Your analysis may have started from an assumption that is different from that of the EzIP. That is, 1) The EzIP proposes to use the 240/4 as a replacement of the 100.64/10 of RFC6598 for enhancing the CG-NAT. Thus, 240/4 will be used as reusable netblocks like those in RFC1918. There will be nothing for corporate to grab. 2) In addition, it is implicitly stated that the addresses in 240/4 will be assigned within a geographical Region, much like telephone numbers that are administrated by governments of respective jurisdictions as natural resources, not by global businesses as private properties. 3) This may sound like against the "Internet way", but likely can eliminate the negative consequences of the current IP address allocation / assignment practices. Regards, Abe (2022-11-23 15:25 EST) On 2022-11-21 19:43, Eric Kuhnke wrote:
Assume the following theoretical scenario:
You have a large number of existing RIPE, ARIN, APNIC ASes which will take any ipv4 resources they can get. They're all on waiting lists or have been informed no new blocks will be forthcoming.
240/4 is something like 256 million IPs.
Let's say that the global benevolent ipv4 dictator decides that each ISP, MNO or other waiting list entity gets a single /16, one time only.
That's 64,000 IPs per corporate entity. Not actually very large at all on the scale of regional mid sized operators with 300,000 last mile broadband subscribers, or mobile network operators, nevermind top-10-size DOCSIS3/GPON/DSL last mile operators that have many dozens of millions of customers. One /16 is a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the demand for IP space for indivudual-customer DHCP pool usage by an ISP the size of Astound or a South Korean GPON operator or similar.
That's 4000 entities which each get their one time /16 and then 240/4 is entirely exhausted.
Unrealistic? Halve it so that each network operator waiting for IP space reources gets one/ 17, one time only, I would still bet good money that there's 8000 ASes out there that right now would happily take their "free "single /17 , and you'd still have immediate complete exhaustion of 240/8.
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 at 16:33, Joe Maimon <jmaimon@jmaimon.com> wrote:
Eric Kuhnke wrote: > In a theoretical scenario where somebody was global benevolent > dictator of ipv4 space, even applying a policy which limited block > size to a few /14 per ISP, it would be possible to exhaust 240/4/in > one week/ if they handed out /14 sized pieces to every existing last > mile LTE network operator with 5+ million customers globally. It is > not a long term solution or even a good medium term solution. > To to the LM LTE Operator with 5+ mill. customer globally, it is not. Agreed. Also, I think they have already sorted themselves out sufficiently in a variety of ways. I am not concerned with them, at all.
Which is why I did not offer that as an example of useful constraint. Re-run your projections with what I actually discussed, I think you will have a different conclusion.
Joe
-- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com