We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there? Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations? Thanks! -- Ryan Gard
We got ours from logicweb, but all the IPs originated from AfriNIC and were blacklisted in several different places. On 19 January 2018 at 14:57, Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
No, nanog.org is a trade association. -mel via cell
On Jan 19, 2018, at 2:34 PM, Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
We got ours from logicweb, but all the IPs originated from AfriNIC and were blacklisted in several different places.
On 19 January 2018 at 14:57, Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
Have you considered IPv6?
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU. On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
Have you considered IPv6?
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU.
Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that dont use ipv6 these days. Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just on Cloudflare where v6 is default on) About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary.
On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
Have you considered IPv6?
Not hard to do in the US where most access networks still aren't supporting IPv6. On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:54 PM, Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU.
Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that dont use ipv6 these days.
Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just on Cloudflare where v6 is default on)
About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary.
On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
Have you considered IPv6?
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 8:50 PM Josh Reynolds <josh@kyneticwifi.com> wrote:
Not hard to do in the US where most access networks still aren't supporting IPv6.
I hear ya, some places are behind. Check this out, close to 80% of mobile subs are on ipv6 across the 4 major carriers http://www.worldipv6launch.org/new-years-resolution-deploy-ipv6/
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:54 PM, Ca By <cb.list6@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU.
Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that dont use ipv6 these days.
Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just on Cloudflare where v6 is default on)
About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary.
On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
Have you considered IPv6?
It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.). ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com> To: "Michael Crapse" <michael@wi-fiber.io> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 9:54:23 PM Subject: Re: Leasing /22 On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU.
Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that dont use ipv6 these days. Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just on Cloudflare where v6 is default on) About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary.
On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
Have you considered IPv6?
On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 10:20 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.).
hulu is on akamai akamai does provide ipv6 frontends (in fact they do v6 on the front and v4 out the back) so... it really should be pretty easy at this point for hulu to move traffic to ipv6.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com> To: "Michael Crapse" <michael@wi-fiber.io> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 9:54:23 PM Subject: Re: Leasing /22
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU.
Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that dont use ipv6 these days.
Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just on Cloudflare where v6 is default on)
About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary.
On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
Have you considered IPv6?
IPv6 still solves your problem if you add any of NAT64, DS-Lite, 464xlat, MAP-T, MAP-E. Yes, you’re NATing, but only the traffic to places like Hulu, and it will decrease over time. And while you need addresses for the outside of the translator, you don’t need as many (or to get more as frequently). Lee On 1/20/18, 10:20 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.).
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com> To: "Michael Crapse" <michael@wi-fiber.io> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 9:54:23 PM Subject: Re: Leasing /22
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU.
Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that dont use ipv6 these days.
Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just on Cloudflare where v6 is default on)
About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary.
On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
Have you considered IPv6?
Add to that CGN from RFC 6598 addresses (100.64/10) + IPv6 though that reaches its limit at ~4M customers. Native IPv4 with a GUA to customers is essentially unavailable for new ISPs. It’s a matter of picking which flavour of NAT you and your customers are going to use. The sooner ALL ISP’s provide IPv6 to their customers the sooner we restore delivering the Internet to the customers. Mark
On 23 Jan 2018, at 9:05 am, Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> wrote:
IPv6 still solves your problem if you add any of NAT64, DS-Lite, 464xlat, MAP-T, MAP-E.
Yes, you’re NATing, but only the traffic to places like Hulu, and it will decrease over time. And while you need addresses for the outside of the translator, you don’t need as many (or to get more as frequently).
Lee
On 1/20/18, 10:20 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.).
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com> To: "Michael Crapse" <michael@wi-fiber.io> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 9:54:23 PM Subject: Re: Leasing /22
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU.
Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that dont use ipv6 these days.
Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just on Cloudflare where v6 is default on)
About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary.
On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
Have you considered IPv6?
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
Customers on ps4s and xboxes will hate you. They will always get "strict" nat, and it's your fault not mega corporation X's fault for not releasing IPv4s On 22 January 2018 at 15:23, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
Add to that CGN from RFC 6598 addresses (100.64/10) + IPv6 though that reaches its limit at ~4M customers.
Native IPv4 with a GUA to customers is essentially unavailable for new ISPs. It’s a matter of picking which flavour of NAT you and your customers are going to use. The sooner ALL ISP’s provide IPv6 to their customers the sooner we restore delivering the Internet to the customers.
Mark
On 23 Jan 2018, at 9:05 am, Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> wrote:
IPv6 still solves your problem if you add any of NAT64, DS-Lite, 464xlat, MAP-T, MAP-E.
Yes, you’re NATing, but only the traffic to places like Hulu, and it will decrease over time. And while you need addresses for the outside of the translator, you don’t need as many (or to get more as frequently).
Lee
On 1/20/18, 10:20 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.).
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com> To: "Michael Crapse" <michael@wi-fiber.io> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 9:54:23 PM Subject: Re: Leasing /22
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU.
Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that dont use ipv6 these days.
Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just on Cloudflare where v6 is default on)
About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary.
On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
-- Ryan Gard
Have you considered IPv6?
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 03:27:49PM -0700, Michael Crapse wrote:
Customers on ps4s and xboxes will hate you. They will always get "strict" nat, and it's your fault not mega corporation X's fault for not releasing IPv4s
I think you misspelled "those console platforms' fault for being bad network citizens": "(10/13/17) As of PS4 update 5.00 no offical IPv6 support has been added." from https://community.playstation.com/content/pdc/us/en_US/pdc-communities/plays... Xbox one actually seems to DTRT: https://support.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/networking/ipv6-on-xbox-one Cheers! Joe
On 22 January 2018 at 15:23, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
Add to that CGN from RFC 6598 addresses (100.64/10) + IPv6 though that reaches its limit at ~4M customers.
Native IPv4 with a GUA to customers is essentially unavailable for new ISPs. It???s a matter of picking which flavour of NAT you and your customers are going to use. The sooner ALL ISP???s provide IPv6 to their customers the sooner we restore delivering the Internet to the customers.
Mark
On 23 Jan 2018, at 9:05 am, Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> wrote:
IPv6 still solves your problem if you add any of NAT64, DS-Lite, 464xlat, MAP-T, MAP-E.
Yes, you???re NATing, but only the traffic to places like Hulu, and it will decrease over time. And while you need addresses for the outside of the translator, you don???t need as many (or to get more as frequently).
Lee
On 1/20/18, 10:20 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.).
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com> To: "Michael Crapse" <michael@wi-fiber.io> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 9:54:23 PM Subject: Re: Leasing /22
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU.
Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that dont use ipv6 these days.
Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just on Cloudflare where v6 is default on)
About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / netflix / apple / amazon ??? but your mix may vary.
On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
> We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are > wondering what the best options are out there? > > Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum > out... Any recommendations? > > Thanks! > > -- > Ryan Gard > Have you considered IPv6?
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
-- Posted from my personal account - see X-Disclaimer header. Joe Provo / Gweep / Earthling
From: Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> Date: Monday, January 22, 2018 at 5:27 PM To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Cc: Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org>, NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Leasing /22
Customers on ps4s and xboxes will hate you. They will always get "strict" nat, and it's your fault not mega corporation X's fault for not releasing IPv4s
Maybe. You don’t have to configure strict NAT on your translator (DS-Lite’s pretty good at this, and although I’m a few weeks away from testing consoles through 464xlat and MAP, they should work, too). And their NAT workarounds are pretty sophisticated now. There comes a point when winning your customers’ love isn’t profitable. I don’t know if that point is $16/address for you, or $30, or $40, or $90. Maybe it varies, depending on the customer. That’s why I suggested in “TCO of CGN”[1] that everyone figure out for themselves how much money you might lose to unhappy customers via CGN, and compare it to how much addresses cost, and at what price point you might turn around and sell addresses. My findings then, based on assumptions that almost certainly are not true for any particular network, and which may have changed, suggest that buying addresses still makes sense. Lee [1] http://ipv6.nanog.org/meetings/abstract?id=2025
On 22 January 2018 at 15:23, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
Add to that CGN from RFC 6598 addresses (100.64/10) + IPv6 though that reaches its limit at ~4M customers.
Native IPv4 with a GUA to customers is essentially unavailable for new ISPs. It’s a matter of picking which flavour of NAT you and your customers are going to use. The sooner ALL ISP’s provide IPv6 to their customers the sooner we restore delivering the Internet to the customers.
Mark
On 23 Jan 2018, at 9:05 am, Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> wrote:
IPv6 still solves your problem if you add any of NAT64, DS-Lite, 464xlat, MAP-T, MAP-E.
Yes, you’re NATing, but only the traffic to places like Hulu, and it will decrease over time. And while you need addresses for the outside of the translator, you don’t need as many (or to get more as frequently).
Lee
On 1/20/18, 10:20 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.).
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com
Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com> To: "Michael Crapse" <michael@wi-fiber.io> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 9:54:23 PM Subject: Re: Leasing /22
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
>> Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? >> Because >> you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU. >>
Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that dont use ipv6 these days.
Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just on Cloudflare where v6 is default on)
About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary.
>> >> >> On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote: >> >>>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>>> We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and
are
> >>>>> wondering what the best options are out there? > >>>>> > >>>>> Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be >> plum > >>>>> out... Any recommendations? > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks! > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Ryan Gard > >>>>> >>>> Have you considered IPv6? >>>> >>
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 <tel:%2B61%202%209871%204742> INTERNET: marka@isc.org
The biggest problems that start to run with cases of CGN or any other v4 aggregation method are services that still continue to treat single IP addresses as a single entity (a certain event ticket vendor comes to mind). Until these organizations either start opening a line of communications with ISPs, changing their methodology when handling traffic from v4 addresses, and/or deploying v6, the song and dance for v4 addressing will continue. On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 7:57 PM, Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> wrote:
From: Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> Date: Monday, January 22, 2018 at 5:27 PM To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Cc: Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org>, NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Leasing /22
Customers on ps4s and xboxes will hate you. They will always get "strict" nat, and it's your fault not mega corporation X's fault for not releasing IPv4s
Maybe. You don’t have to configure strict NAT on your translator (DS-Lite’s pretty good at this, and although I’m a few weeks away from testing consoles through 464xlat and MAP, they should work, too). And their NAT workarounds are pretty sophisticated now.
There comes a point when winning your customers’ love isn’t profitable. I don’t know if that point is $16/address for you, or $30, or $40, or $90. Maybe it varies, depending on the customer.
That’s why I suggested in “TCO of CGN”[1] that everyone figure out for themselves how much money you might lose to unhappy customers via CGN, and compare it to how much addresses cost, and at what price point you might turn around and sell addresses. My findings then, based on assumptions that almost certainly are not true for any particular network, and which may have changed, suggest that buying addresses still makes sense.
Lee
[1] http://ipv6.nanog.org/meetings/abstract?id=2025
On 22 January 2018 at 15:23, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
Add to that CGN from RFC 6598 addresses (100.64/10) + IPv6 though that reaches its limit at ~4M customers.
Native IPv4 with a GUA to customers is essentially unavailable for new ISPs. It’s a matter of picking which flavour of NAT you and your customers are going to use. The sooner ALL ISP’s provide IPv6 to their customers the sooner we restore delivering the Internet to the
Mark
On 23 Jan 2018, at 9:05 am, Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> wrote:
IPv6 still solves your problem if you add any of NAT64, DS-Lite,
464xlat,
MAP-T, MAP-E.
Yes, you’re NATing, but only the traffic to places like Hulu, and it will decrease over time. And while you need addresses for the outside of
translator, you don’t need as many (or to get more as frequently).
Lee
On 1/20/18, 10:20 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
> It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are > using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to > fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.). > > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > Midwest-IX > http://www.midwest-ix.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com> > To: "Michael Crapse" <michael@wi-fiber.io> > Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 9:54:23 PM > Subject: Re: Leasing /22 > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse < michael@wi-fiber.io> > wrote: > >>> Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? >>> Because >>> you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU. >>> > > Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content
customers. the providers that
> dont use ipv6 these days. > > Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just > on Cloudflare where v6 is default on) > > About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / > netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary. > > > >>> >>> >>> On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote: >>> > >>>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>> >> >>>>> We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are >> >>>>> wondering what the best options are out there? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be >>> plum >> >>>>> out... Any recommendations? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Thanks! >> >>>>> >> >>>>> -- >> >>>>> Ryan Gard >> >>>>> > >>>> Have you considered IPv6? > >>>> >>> > >
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 <tel:%2B61%202%209871%204742> INTERNET: marka@isc.org
-- Ryan Gard
The funnest part is telling DMCA/RIAA that an IP address means nothing, not without a port and exact time, someitmes down to a 10 minute mark. CGNAT + NAT64/464 xlat using the fewest ipv4s as possible(as suggested) also requires a large database to retain all records of every port and ipv4 address connected with every new connection. On 23 January 2018 at 09:56, Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote:
The biggest problems that start to run with cases of CGN or any other v4 aggregation method are services that still continue to treat single IP addresses as a single entity (a certain event ticket vendor comes to mind). Until these organizations either start opening a line of communications with ISPs, changing their methodology when handling traffic from v4 addresses, and/or deploying v6, the song and dance for v4 addressing will continue.
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 7:57 PM, Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> wrote:
From: Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> Date: Monday, January 22, 2018 at 5:27 PM To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Cc: Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org>, NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Leasing /22
Customers on ps4s and xboxes will hate you. They will always get "strict" nat, and it's your fault not mega corporation X's fault for not releasing IPv4s
Maybe. You don’t have to configure strict NAT on your translator (DS-Lite’s pretty good at this, and although I’m a few weeks away from testing consoles through 464xlat and MAP, they should work, too). And their NAT workarounds are pretty sophisticated now.
There comes a point when winning your customers’ love isn’t profitable. I don’t know if that point is $16/address for you, or $30, or $40, or $90. Maybe it varies, depending on the customer.
That’s why I suggested in “TCO of CGN”[1] that everyone figure out for themselves how much money you might lose to unhappy customers via CGN, and compare it to how much addresses cost, and at what price point you might turn around and sell addresses. My findings then, based on assumptions that almost certainly are not true for any particular network, and which may have changed, suggest that buying addresses still makes sense.
Lee
[1] http://ipv6.nanog.org/meetings/abstract?id=2025
On 22 January 2018 at 15:23, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
Add to that CGN from RFC 6598 addresses (100.64/10) + IPv6 though that reaches its limit at ~4M customers.
Native IPv4 with a GUA to customers is essentially unavailable for new ISPs. It’s a matter of picking which flavour of NAT you and your customers are going to use. The sooner ALL ISP’s provide IPv6 to their customers the sooner we restore delivering the Internet to the
Mark
On 23 Jan 2018, at 9:05 am, Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> wrote:
IPv6 still solves your problem if you add any of NAT64, DS-Lite,
464xlat,
MAP-T, MAP-E.
Yes, you’re NATing, but only the traffic to places like Hulu, and it will decrease over time. And while you need addresses for the outside of
translator, you don’t need as many (or to get more as frequently).
Lee
On 1/20/18, 10:20 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
>> It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are >> using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to >> fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.). >> >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> Midwest-IX >> http://www.midwest-ix.com >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com> >> To: "Michael Crapse" <michael@wi-fiber.io> >> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> >> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 9:54:23 PM >> Subject: Re: Leasing /22 >> >> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse < michael@wi-fiber.io> >> wrote: >> > >>> Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? > >>> Because > >>> you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with > HULU. > >>> >> >> Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content
customers. the providers that
>> dont use ipv6 these days. >> >> Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just >> on Cloudflare where v6 is default on) >> >> About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / >> netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary. >> >> >> > >>> > >>> > >>> On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote: > >>> >> >>>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com
>> wrote: >> >>>> >>> >>>>> We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are >>> >>>>> wondering what the best options are out there? >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be > >>> plum >>> >>>>> out... Any recommendations? >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> Thanks! >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> -- >>> >>>>> Ryan Gard >>> >>>>> >> >>>> Have you considered IPv6? >> >>>> > >>> >> >>
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia <https://maps.google.com/?q=1+Seymour+St.,+Dundas+Valley,+NSW+2117,+Australia&entry=gmail&source=g> PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 <tel:%2B61%202%209871%204742> INTERNET: marka@isc.org
-- Ryan Gard
Which is where MAP-T and MAP-E help as they reduce the amount of logging required.
On 24 Jan 2018, at 3:59 am, Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> wrote:
The funnest part is telling DMCA/RIAA that an IP address means nothing, not without a port and exact time, someitmes down to a 10 minute mark. CGNAT + NAT64/464 xlat using the fewest ipv4s as possible(as suggested) also requires a large database to retain all records of every port and ipv4 address connected with every new connection.
On 23 January 2018 at 09:56, Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> wrote: The biggest problems that start to run with cases of CGN or any other v4 aggregation method are services that still continue to treat single IP addresses as a single entity (a certain event ticket vendor comes to mind). Until these organizations either start opening a line of communications with ISPs, changing their methodology when handling traffic from v4 addresses, and/or deploying v6, the song and dance for v4 addressing will continue.
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 7:57 PM, Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> wrote:
From: Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> Date: Monday, January 22, 2018 at 5:27 PM To: Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> Cc: Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org>, NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org> Subject: Re: Leasing /22
Customers on ps4s and xboxes will hate you. They will always get "strict" nat, and it's your fault not mega corporation X's fault for not releasing IPv4s
Maybe. You don’t have to configure strict NAT on your translator (DS-Lite’s pretty good at this, and although I’m a few weeks away from testing consoles through 464xlat and MAP, they should work, too). And their NAT workarounds are pretty sophisticated now.
There comes a point when winning your customers’ love isn’t profitable. I don’t know if that point is $16/address for you, or $30, or $40, or $90. Maybe it varies, depending on the customer.
That’s why I suggested in “TCO of CGN”[1] that everyone figure out for themselves how much money you might lose to unhappy customers via CGN, and compare it to how much addresses cost, and at what price point you might turn around and sell addresses. My findings then, based on assumptions that almost certainly are not true for any particular network, and which may have changed, suggest that buying addresses still makes sense.
Lee
[1] http://ipv6.nanog.org/meetings/abstract?id=2025
On 22 January 2018 at 15:23, Mark Andrews <marka@isc.org> wrote:
Add to that CGN from RFC 6598 addresses (100.64/10) + IPv6 though that reaches its limit at ~4M customers.
Native IPv4 with a GUA to customers is essentially unavailable for new ISPs. It’s a matter of picking which flavour of NAT you and your customers are going to use. The sooner ALL ISP’s provide IPv6 to their customers the sooner we restore delivering the Internet to the customers.
Mark
On 23 Jan 2018, at 9:05 am, Lee Howard <lee@asgard.org> wrote:
IPv6 still solves your problem if you add any of NAT64, DS-Lite, 464xlat, MAP-T, MAP-E.
Yes, you’re NATing, but only the traffic to places like Hulu, and it will decrease over time. And while you need addresses for the outside of the translator, you don’t need as many (or to get more as frequently).
Lee
On 1/20/18, 10:20 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett" <nanog-bounces@nanog.org on behalf of nanog@ics-il.net> wrote:
> It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are > using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to > fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.). > > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions > http://www.ics-il.com > > Midwest-IX > http://www.midwest-ix.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com> > To: "Michael Crapse" <michael@wi-fiber.io> > Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> > Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 9:54:23 PM > Subject: Re: Leasing /22 > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 5:48 PM Michael Crapse <michael@wi-fiber.io> > wrote: > >>> Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? >>> Because >>> you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU. >>> > > Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that > dont use ipv6 these days. > > Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just > on Cloudflare where v6 is default on) > > About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb / > netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary. > > > >>> >>> >>> On 19 January 2018 at 18:38, Andrew Kirch <trelane@trelane.net> wrote: >>> > >>>> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Ryan Gard <ryangard@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>> >> >>>>> We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and
are
>> >>>>> wondering what the best options are out there? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be >>> plum >> >>>>> out... Any recommendations? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> Thanks! >> >>>>> >> >>>>> -- >> >>>>> Ryan Gard >> >>>>> > >>>> Have you considered IPv6? > >>>> >>> > >
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 <tel:%2B61%202%209871%204742> INTERNET: marka@isc.org
-- Ryan Gard
-- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@isc.org
In article <CAAQxoQELWiE8ywF2hJF8AiM+6JJVxOpHV1-Ef19tcMOCc2E=mg@mail.gmail.com> you write:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
It's been a long time since I've seen IP space for lease that wasn't either a scam or totally poisoned. If it were actually usable, it'd be for sale, not for lease. R's, John
On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 9:08 PM, John Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
In article <CAAQxoQELWiE8ywF2hJF8AiM+6JJVxOpHV1-Ef19tcMOCc2E=mg@ mail.gmail.com> you write:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are wondering what the best options are out there?
It's been a long time since I've seen IP space for lease that wasn't either a scam or totally poisoned.
If it were actually usable, it'd be for sale, not for lease.
is it possible that the OP means: "sale" which I think in arin region still really means: "Transfer" ? otherwise, I'd think: "get a link to an ISP, put forth the justification for a /22 and ... rock on"
participants (13)
-
Andrew Kirch -
Ca By -
Christopher Morrow -
Joe Provo -
John Levine -
Josh Reynolds -
Lee Howard -
Mark Andrews -
Mel Beckman -
Michael Crapse -
Mike Hammett -
Randy Bush -
Ryan Gard