ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of 45/8 address block
FYI, /John ---- https://www.arin.net/announcements/2010/20101020.html Posted: Wednesday, 20 October 2010 ARIN today recognizes Interop, an organization with a long-standing presence in the Internet industry, for returning its unneeded Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) address space. Interop was originally allocated a /8 before ARIN's existence and the availability of smaller-sized address blocks. The organization recently realized it was only using a small portion of its address block and that returning the remainder to ARIN would be for the greater good of the Internet community. ARIN will accept the returned space and not reissue it for a short period, per existing operational procedure. After the hold period, ARIN will follow global policy at that time and return it to the global free pool or distribute the space to those organizations in the ARIN region with documented need, as appropriate. With less than 5% of the IPv4 address space left in the global free pool, ARIN warns that Interop's return will not significantly extend the life of IPv4. ARIN continues to emphasize the need for all Internet stakeholders to adopt the next generation of Internet Protocol, IPv6. Regards, Communications and Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers
i think this is cool, but ...
ARIN will follow global policy at that time and return it to the global free pool or distribute the space to those organizations in the ARIN region with documented need, as appropriate.
i know the us has the world series, but global > arin region randy
On Oct 20, 2010, at 10:13 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
i think this is cool, but ...
ARIN will follow global policy at that time and return it to the global free pool or distribute the space to those organizations in the ARIN region with documented need, as appropriate.
i know the us has the world series, but global > arin region
The problem is that we haven't been able to get a global policy for returned address space, i.e. IANA has no policy on how to assign less than full /8's. The first global policy 2009-3 did not reach consensus on the same text in all regions, and 2010-10 is still under discussion. So, there's no way to know if there's a global policy which would allow the space to be returned to the IANA, but I'm optimistic... /John
ARIN will follow global policy at that time and return it to the global free pool or distribute the space to those organizations in the ARIN region with documented need, as appropriate.
i know the us has the world series, but global > arin region
The problem is that we haven't been able to get a global policy for returned address space, i.e. IANA has no policy on how to assign less than full /8's. The first global policy 2009-3 did not reach consensus on the same text in all regions, and 2010-10 is still under discussion.
So, there's no way to know if there's a global policy which would allow the space to be returned to the IANA, but I'm optimistic...
ahh. my problem. lack of coffee. i missed the "OR." sorry. i would guess iana would take it. randy
On 10/20/2010 7:13 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
i think this is cool, but ...
ARIN will follow global policy at that time and return it to the global free pool or distribute the space to those organizations in the ARIN region with documented need, as appropriate.
i know the us has the world series, but global> arin region
I would like to join the chorus of applause for Interop's generosity. I agree with those who've said that this only buys us a little more time, but they did the right thing, and we should applaud them for that; along with the DOD and others who have returned their unneeded space. As for the fact that the block was released to ARIN as opposed to going back in the free pool, the effect may ultimately be the same. Allocations from IANA to the RIRs happen under the policy posted at http://www.icann.org/en/general/allocation-IPv4-rirs.html. The determination of when to allocate a new /8 is based on the amount of free space that the RIR has on hand at the time of the request. There are 12 /8s remaining atm, and 5 of those will automatically be allocated 1 per RIR when the other 7 have been allocated under the normal policy. I am confident that ARIN will also do the right thing here and include the /8 from Interop in their free space calculation before requesting an allocation of one of the 7 /8s in the free pool. hth, Doug -- Breadth of IT experience, and | Nothin' ever doesn't change, depth of knowledge in the DNS. | but nothin' changes much. Yours for the right price. :) | -- OK Go http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Thank you Interop - for performing an outstanding act of altruism. John, could you provide more details at this stage on how much address space was returned to ARIN? Nick On 20/10/2010 14:34, John Curran wrote:
FYI, /John
---- https://www.arin.net/announcements/2010/20101020.html
Posted: Wednesday, 20 October 2010
ARIN today recognizes Interop, an organization with a long-standing presence in the Internet industry, for returning its unneeded Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) address space.
Interop was originally allocated a /8 before ARIN's existence and the availability of smaller-sized address blocks. The organization recently realized it was only using a small portion of its address block and that returning the remainder to ARIN would be for the greater good of the Internet community.
ARIN will accept the returned space and not reissue it for a short period, per existing operational procedure. After the hold period, ARIN will follow global policy at that time and return it to the global free pool or distribute the space to those organizations in the ARIN region with documented need, as appropriate.
With less than 5% of the IPv4 address space left in the global free pool, ARIN warns that Interop's return will not significantly extend the life of IPv4. ARIN continues to emphasize the need for all Internet stakeholders to adopt the next generation of Internet Protocol, IPv6.
Regards,
Communications and Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers
Now, if we could get everyone that has these gigantic /8's (or multiple of them) that aren't using them to give some back, that'd be great. Thank you interop for setting the example. Joel On Oct 20, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Thank you Interop - for performing an outstanding act of altruism.
John, could you provide more details at this stage on how much address space was returned to ARIN?
Nick
On 20/10/2010 14:34, John Curran wrote:
FYI, /John
---- https://www.arin.net/announcements/2010/20101020.html
Posted: Wednesday, 20 October 2010
ARIN today recognizes Interop, an organization with a long-standing presence in the Internet industry, for returning its unneeded Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) address space.
Interop was originally allocated a /8 before ARIN's existence and the availability of smaller-sized address blocks. The organization recently realized it was only using a small portion of its address block and that returning the remainder to ARIN would be for the greater good of the Internet community.
ARIN will accept the returned space and not reissue it for a short period, per existing operational procedure. After the hold period, ARIN will follow global policy at that time and return it to the global free pool or distribute the space to those organizations in the ARIN region with documented need, as appropriate.
With less than 5% of the IPv4 address space left in the global free pool, ARIN warns that Interop's return will not significantly extend the life of IPv4. ARIN continues to emphasize the need for all Internet stakeholders to adopt the next generation of Internet Protocol, IPv6.
Regards,
Communications and Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers
-- Joel Esler http://www.joelesler.net
[John, is 45.127.0.0/16 one of the two blocks they keep, or is it hijacked already? :) ] On 2010-10-20 17:11, Joel Esler wrote:
Now, if we could get everyone that has these gigantic /8's (or multiple of them) that aren't using them to give some back, that'd be great.
The problem with that is indeed in that little part about "aren't using them", if even only 50% is in use because one allocated it quite sparsely you won't be able to quickly clean it up and return it.
Thank you interop for setting the example.
For delaying the inevitable by what, a month!? It is indeed really great that they took the effort to do so, but then again, they where not always using this prefix, only during events, thus it must have been quite empty. The fact that RIPE's RIS hasn't even seen the prefix announced ever says enough about that part. Doesn't mean it is not being used by other parties though: 45.127.0.0/16 13767 DBANK - DataBank Holdings, Ltd. 2009-04-10 15:43:59 UTC 2010-10-20 14:11:43 UTC One can of course wonder if they are supposed to use that or not. The fact that they do not have reverse DNS delegation for it says quite a bit already of course. Maybe that is one of the two /16's that they are keeping to themselves, seems to be used that way for over a year already. I assume L(3) did proper checking. Greets, Jeroen
On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:24 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
The problem with that is indeed in that little part about "aren't using them", if even only 50% is in use because one allocated it quite sparsely you won't be able to quickly clean it up and return it.
Correct. It might make sense to do so, if you could recover the costs of the work involved. This is the reasoning behind the Specified Transfer policy that was recently adopted; it allows (once we're at depletion) for parties to free up address space and get compensated. It's goal is not to provide a windfall for those holding unused space; in theory, those with unused address space should be returning it already if they can easily do so.
One can of course wonder if they are supposed to use that or not. The fact that they do not have reverse DNS delegation for it says quite a bit already of course.
One of the other benefits of improved utilization for returned space is less space which is "sitting idle" and available to be hijacked. /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
I wonder if we'll see a decrease in hijacked space because there's less unassigned space, or if because of the IPv4 block scarcity, it will occur more often. I can see aggressive hijackers looking for unused (but assigned) blocks as small as a /24 and advertising them. Frank -----Original Message----- From: John Curran [mailto:jcurran@arin.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 10:38 AM To: Jeroen Massar Cc: nanog@nanog.org Operators Group Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of 45/8 address block On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:24 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
The problem with that is indeed in that little part about "aren't using them", if even only 50% is in use because one allocated it quite sparsely you won't be able to quickly clean it up and return it.
Correct. It might make sense to do so, if you could recover the costs of the work involved. This is the reasoning behind the Specified Transfer policy that was recently adopted; it allows (once we're at depletion) for parties to free up address space and get compensated. It's goal is not to provide a windfall for those holding unused space; in theory, those with unused address space should be returning it already if they can easily do so.
One can of course wonder if they are supposed to use that or not. The fact that they do not have reverse DNS delegation for it says quite a bit already of course.
One of the other benefits of improved utilization for returned space is less space which is "sitting idle" and available to be hijacked. /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Jeroen Massar wrote:
[John, is 45.127.0.0/16 one of the two blocks they keep, or is it hijacked already? :) ]
I can authoritatively say, yes it is. We (Interop) are not announcing any part of 45/8 at the moment, and don't plan to do so until the return is complete. I'll attempt to contact the players involved here and get 45.127/16 taken down. If anyone is listening that can help, it would be appreciated. I'm not subcribed to NANOG with the official address, but I can be reached at bross@interop.net as well. -- Brandon Ross AIM: BrandonNRoss ICQ: 2269442 Skype: brandonross Yahoo: BrandonNRoss
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Brandon Ross wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Jeroen Massar wrote:
[John, is 45.127.0.0/16 one of the two blocks they keep, or is it hijacked already? :) ]
I can authoritatively say, yes it is.
I spoke too soon. It is not hijacked, it's simply old cruft from an old show that we didn't have removed. We'll take care of it shortly. -- Brandon Ross AIM: BrandonNRoss ICQ: 2269442 Skype: brandonross Yahoo: BrandonNRoss
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:11 AM, Joel Esler <joel.esler@me.com> wrote:
Now, if we could get everyone that has these gigantic /8's (or multiple of them) that aren't using them to give some back, that'd be great.
it's nice that interop did a nice thing here, but seriously, this is ~3 months of usage... there is no saving the move to v6, the bottom's going to fall out on or about june 2011 it seems.
On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:27 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
it's nice that interop did a nice thing here, but seriously, this is ~3 months of usage... there is no saving the move to v6, the bottom's going to fall out on or about june 2011 it seems.
I agree with Chris; this (and any other returns) won't change the IPv4 depletion/IPv6 deployment timeline substantially, but it's also true we have folks who are just now realizing IPv4 depletion is happening and returned address space may make the difference for those who need just a bit more time... /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
* John Curran:
I agree with Chris; this (and any other returns) won't change the IPv4 depletion/IPv6 deployment timeline substantially,
I guess there are a lots of unused assignments within provider-dependent address space. In my experience with a couple of LIRs, none of them was very eager to reclaim address space after the contractual requirement to provide it disappeared, and only some of them reclaimed it after I asked them to. All that unused address space adds up, too. On the other hand, it's probably more efficient to switch to an addressing architecture which will not require proper resource management for the forseeable future. -- Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de> BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://www.bfk.de/ Kriegsstraße 100 tel: +49-721-96201-1 D-76133 Karlsruhe fax: +49-721-96201-99
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Joel Esler wrote:
Now, if we could get everyone that has these gigantic /8's (or multiple of them) that aren't using them to give some back, that'd be great.
Thank you interop for setting the example.
Sure, it would be a nice gesture if MIT/HP/Ford/Xerox/Halliburton/etc gave back the chunks of the /8s they weren't using, but it wouldn't significantly affect when the IPv4 well runs dry. Also, without knowing how those organizations have used the space internally, such an altruistic gesture could also come at the cost of having to de-aggregate a bunch of advertisements in BGP. The law of diminishing returns comes into play. jms
On Oct 20, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Thank you Interop - for performing an outstanding act of altruism.
John, could you provide more details at this stage on how much address space was returned to ARIN?
Nick
On 20/10/2010 14:34, John Curran wrote:
FYI, /John
---- https://www.arin.net/announcements/2010/20101020.html
Posted: Wednesday, 20 October 2010
ARIN today recognizes Interop, an organization with a long-standing presence in the Internet industry, for returning its unneeded Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) address space.
Interop was originally allocated a /8 before ARIN's existence and the availability of smaller-sized address blocks. The organization recently realized it was only using a small portion of its address block and that returning the remainder to ARIN would be for the greater good of the Internet community.
ARIN will accept the returned space and not reissue it for a short period, per existing operational procedure. After the hold period, ARIN will follow global policy at that time and return it to the global free pool or distribute the space to those organizations in the ARIN region with documented need, as appropriate.
With less than 5% of the IPv4 address space left in the global free pool, ARIN warns that Interop's return will not significantly extend the life of IPv4. ARIN continues to emphasize the need for all Internet stakeholders to adopt the next generation of Internet Protocol, IPv6.
Regards,
Communications and Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers
-- Joel Esler http://www.joelesler.net
On Oct 20, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Thank you Interop - for performing an outstanding act of altruism.
John, could you provide more details at this stage on how much address space was returned to ARIN?
INTEROP is retaining 2 /16 blocks for existing usage; i.e. more than 99% of the /8 block is being returned. To the extent that parties have unused address space beyond their usage and foreseeable need, we encourage them to return the space so it may be reissued to those parties with need. This is in keeping with global policies on Internet address space management. /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
John Curran wrote:
On Oct 20, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
Thank you Interop - for performing an outstanding act of altruism.
John, could you provide more details at this stage on how much address space was returned to ARIN?
INTEROP is retaining 2 /16 blocks for existing usage; i.e. more than 99% of the /8 block is being returned.
I remember writing (complaining) about it in a thread back in April, appreciated. Thanks, Jeroen -- http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/ http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 03:23:48PM -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
I remember writing (complaining) about it in a thread back in April, appreciated.
I still don't know why anyone would complain, although I do thank Interop for their generosity. Here's some truth: 1) At most, we buy ourselves a few months. 2) Specified transfer is really just a way for those that would have to renumber to free up space, to be compensated for their expense in doing so. 3) We can reclaim parts of every /8 we want, and the only thing we'll do is give those that are slow to migrate to v6 an excuse to stall a bit longer. We're gonna hit the wall. Delaying the inevitable, is not really in anyone's interest. The sooner we hit the wall, the sooner that v6 deployment clue is imparted.* --msa * And I say this as one of the people that spent many years bitching about v6's flaws -- however, we no longer have time to debate them, or try to switch horses midstream, 6rd style. That ship sailed. Suck it up and go native, already. Sheesh. If you work for an MSO, I am *really* talking to you, especially if your name starts with a C and ends with an x. Thanks for listening.
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
Thank you Interop - for performing an outstanding act of altruism.
John, could you provide more details at this stage on how much address space was returned to ARIN?
less than 3 months supply at the going drain rate.
On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:26 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:
Thank you Interop - for performing an outstanding act of altruism.
John, could you provide more details at this stage on how much address space was returned to ARIN?
less than 3 months supply at the going drain rate.
Not to be depressing, but a /8 (or 99% of one :-) is potentially less than one month's drain on the global IPv4 free pool, if one considers the allocations over the last 12 months to be predictive. /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:28 AM, John Curran <jcurran@arin.net> wrote:
On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:26 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
less than 3 months supply at the going drain rate.
Not to be depressing, but a /8 (or 99% of one :-) is potentially less than one month's drain on the global IPv4 free pool, if one considers the allocations over the last 12 months to be predictive.
yes, sorry.. since this was returned to ARIN, I assumed the ARIN region drain rate.
On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:35 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
yes, sorry.. since this was returned to ARIN, I assumed the ARIN region drain rate.
Ah, good point. It may end up in the global pool, so comparison to either drain rate is quite reasonable. /John
John Curran wrote:
On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:35 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
yes, sorry.. since this was returned to ARIN, I assumed the ARIN region drain rate.
Ah, good point. It may end up in the global pool, so comparison to either drain rate is quite reasonable.
For what it's worth, at this point it really doesn't matter much if 45/8 stays at ARIN or goes back to IANA. RIPE is due for a pair around 12/15 -->> IANA @ 10 APnic burned through the last 2 in 67 days, so given end of year slowing they should be back for another pair around 1/2/11. -->> IANA @ 8 If 45/8 goes back to IANA, ARIN is due to get a pair around 2/1. -->> IANA @ 6 + 45/8 APnic comes back for the last one + 45/8 around 3/1 -->> IANA @ 5 triggers end of pool. If ARIN keeps 45/8, the only difference would be they would probably not qualify for the estimated 2/1/11 allocation, so that event would be delayed and when 45/8 was used up so they would qualify, there would only be 1 left because APnic would have gotten their pair around 3/1 first. Any way you cut it, around 3/1/11 APnic/ARIN/RIPE will each be holding around 4 /8's + their remaining share of 'Various Registries' (ARIN's last one could sit at IANA for an additional couple of weeks, but they would still be next in line unless they take too long). The wild card to the above scenario is Afrinic. They are close enough for an unusual event to qualify them for another /8 from IANA within this timeframe. If that happens, the disposition of 45/8 could impact how many APnic is holding around 3/1/11. Given that APnic is burning through a /8 on an accelerating pace currently at 33 days, +/- one will impact how soon the address market takes off. If Afrinic gets one and 45/8 stays at ARIN, APnic will pick up the last pair at IANA around 3/1 and be completely out within 6 months. If 45/8 goes back, ARIN picks up 2 in early Feb, so with Afrinic getting one there would only be one left for APnic. Tony
Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Nick Hilliard<nick@foobar.org> wrote:
Thank you Interop - for performing an outstanding act of altruism.
John, could you provide more details at this stage on how much address space was returned to ARIN?
less than 3 months supply at the going drain rate.
So would it be more logical for all those willing to return do so only after depletion when the impact and resulting appreciation is likely to be greater? Plus, those less altruistic could weigh the options better after real value is associated with the scarce resource. Joe
I don't think ARIN (or any other RIR) wants people to think this way. Appreciation and value are words that most folks at ICANN don't want network engineers to associate with IP addresses. "The real value is in routing"; is the party line. STLS to me is kind of double speak, ARIN says: "this isn't a capital resource", but yet if you go through us and list your 'unused' blocks in this space, we don't care what financial transaction happens behind the scenes. Maybe John can shed more light on this. For some background, go over to the Internet-history mailing list, which included a very lively discussion of "ownership interest" in IP addresses. Ernie On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
So would it be more logical for all those willing to return do so only after depletion when the impact and resulting appreciation is likely to be greater?
Plus, those less altruistic could weigh the options better after real value is associated with the scarce resource.
On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:04 PM, Ernie Rubi wrote:
I don't think ARIN (or any other RIR) wants people to think this way.
Ernie - ARIN doesn't have a view on how people should think. It does have an interest in making sure that number resources policies that are adopted by community are followed.
STLS to me is kind of double speak, ARIN says: "this isn't a capital resource", but yet if you go through us and list your 'unused' blocks in this space, we don't care what financial transaction happens behind the scenes.
Maybe John can shed more light on this.
Specified Transfer Listing Service (STLS) is a service, not a policy. You don't need to use the STLS to make use of the Specified Transfer policy. The Specified Transfer policy lets parties to free up address space (that might not otherwise be available) and then arrange transfer to another party. Given that a lot of IPv4 address space may be readily available given a little work to renumber, it was felt to be a reasonable compromise in encouraging better utilization once we've run out of the IP4 free pool. Parties which receive under the specified transfer policy still must meet all of the normal address allocation requirements, including documented need. /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
So would it be more logical for all those willing to return do so only after depletion when the impact and resulting appreciation is likely to be greater?
It would be best for folks who can return address space to do so as soon as possible, since that space could then be made available under existing allocation policies. It is likely that there are many organizations which would qualify under current need-based policy which may not have any meaningful chance to receive address space post-depletion.
Plus, those less altruistic could weigh the options better after real value is associated with the scarce resource.
Parties that could return space now and are holding it entirely to profiteer are not envisioned in RFC 2050. ARIN recognizes that such parties could use the specified transfer policy to receive compensation despite being able to return the space, but overall the community recommended proceeding because the benefit to overall utilization was deemed worthwhile. /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
On 10/20/2010 11:20 AM, John Curran wrote:
ARIN recognizes that such parties could use the specified transfer policy to receive compensation despite being able to return the space, but overall the community recommended proceeding because the benefit to overall utilization was deemed worthwhile.
Speaking of which, has any research been done on determining the likelihood that PE pools (which probably consist of a huge number of blocks) will be returned as IPv6 is adopted at the edge? I'm curious, as I suspect that the second I have no choice but to put a single customer as v6 only using nat64, at that point, I might as well convert all customers so that troubleshooting problems is uniform and reduce the support costs. Of course, I'm still waiting on decent equipment that will handle this mass transition, but luckily I'm not to that point yet. Returns like this buy us time before the real hard choices come into play (which gives vendors and ISPs time for development). Jack
On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:43 AM, Nick Hilliard<nick@foobar.org> wrote:
Thank you Interop - for performing an outstanding act of altruism.
John, could you provide more details at this stage on how much address space was returned to ARIN?
less than 3 months supply at the going drain rate.
So would it be more logical for all those willing to return do so only after depletion when the impact and resulting appreciation is likely to be greater?
That was my overall point. There are lots of places that /8, and multiple ones at that that aren't using them. I'm not saying it'll put off going to v6 for years, but it'll help in our current time. -- Joel Esler http://www.joelesler.net
On Oct 20, 2010, at 4:58 PM, David Conrad wrote:
On Oct 20, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Joel Esler wrote:
There are lots of places that /8, and multiple ones at that that aren't using them.
Which /8s are those?
As someone else mentioned the Gov't has /8's they aren't using the whole of. -- Joel Esler http://www.joelesler.net
----- Original Message -----
On Oct 20, 2010, at 4:58 PM, David Conrad wrote:
On Oct 20, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Joel Esler wrote:
There are lots of places that /8, and multiple ones at that that aren't using them.
Which /8s are those?
As someone else mentioned the Gov't has /8's they aren't using the whole of.
That would be incredibly fun to try to recover. I would imagine converting to IPv6, then coming up with a new standard, and converting to that would be an order of magnitude easier than figuring out a way to recover IPv4 space from the US government. -Randy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Carpenter" <rcarpen@network1.net> To: "Joel Esler" <joel.esler@me.com> Cc: "North American Network Operators Group" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Thursday, 21 October, 2010 10:00:25 AM Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of 45/8 address block ----- Original Message -----
On Oct 20, 2010, at 4:58 PM, David Conrad wrote:
On Oct 20, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Joel Esler wrote:
There are lots of places that /8, and multiple ones at that that aren't using them.
Which /8s are those?
As someone else mentioned the Gov't has /8's they aren't using the whole of.
That would be incredibly fun to try to recover. I would imagine converting to IPv6, then coming up with a new standard, and converting to that would be an order of magnitude easier than figuring out a way to recover IPv4 space from the US government.
Ask a russian spammer to recover it, may be?
Interested to know how this will show in the IANA v4 address space registry. Will 045/8 soon appear as belonging to ARIN, since it is now not Interop's? Also makes me wonder if there are historical versions of this registry available. If reclamation of large blocks such as this becomes commonplace, will many of the legacy allocations simply become footnotes? (In the registry document, as well as in history?) -S. On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 14:34 +0100, John Curran wrote:
FYI, /John
---- https://www.arin.net/announcements/2010/20101020.html
Posted: Wednesday, 20 October 2010
ARIN today recognizes Interop, an organization with a long-standing presence in the Internet industry, for returning its unneeded Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) address space.
Interop was originally allocated a /8 before ARIN's existence and the availability of smaller-sized address blocks. The organization recently realized it was only using a small portion of its address block and that returning the remainder to ARIN would be for the greater good of the Internet community.
ARIN will accept the returned space and not reissue it for a short period, per existing operational procedure. After the hold period, ARIN will follow global policy at that time and return it to the global free pool or distribute the space to those organizations in the ARIN region with documented need, as appropriate.
With less than 5% of the IPv4 address space left in the global free pool, ARIN warns that Interop's return will not significantly extend the life of IPv4. ARIN continues to emphasize the need for all Internet stakeholders to adopt the next generation of Internet Protocol, IPv6.
Regards,
Communications and Member Services American Registry for Internet Numbers
On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Stephen D. Strowes wrote:
Interested to know how this will show in the IANA v4 address space registry. Will 045/8 soon appear as belonging to ARIN, since it is now not Interop's?
Correct. Also note that the concept of a single RIR managing each /8 only applies under certain circumstances; there are many cases where multiple RIR's manage resources under a given block and work together to make sure that things like in-addr (and RPKI) function. This could easily be the case with this particular address block at some future time, depending on the state of global return policy.
Also makes me wonder if there are historical versions of this registry available. If reclamation of large blocks such as this becomes commonplace, will many of the legacy allocations simply become footnotes? (In the registry document, as well as in history?)
This has already happened in many cases; address blocks previously held by US DoD, BBN, Stanford were returned, held for a period, and then reissued. /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 17:40 +0100, John Curran wrote:
Also makes me wonder if there are historical versions of this registry available. If reclamation of large blocks such as this becomes commonplace, will many of the legacy allocations simply become footnotes? (In the registry document, as well as in history?)
This has already happened in many cases; address blocks previously held by US DoD, BBN, Stanford were returned, held for a period, and then reissued.
Indeed yes. And these returned blocks aren't noted in the IANA registry (for good reason I guess; the registry is meant to be current.) Is this historical information noted anywhere? -S.
On 10/20/10 7:34 AM, John Curran wrote:
With less than 5% of the IPv4 address space left in the global free pool, ARIN warns that Interop's return will not significantly extend the life of IPv4. ARIN continues to emphasize the need for all Internet stakeholders to adopt the next generation of Internet Protocol, IPv6.
Not to stir an already boiling over pot and all, but is there any kind of report or documentation on releasing of space from countries other then the North American region? I'd hate to think that the rest of the world thinks that the US should be the one to give up all their space so that they can continue to hand out space like candy... -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org
On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:47 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote:
Not to stir an already boiling over pot and all, but is there any kind of report or documentation on releasing of space from countries other then the North American region?
You're not going to find a lot of large allocations which are unused in other regions, predominantly because these allocations where made at the earliest time of the Internet to organizations that were mostly in the ARIN region.
I'd hate to think that the rest of the world thinks that the US should be the one to give up all their space so that they can continue to hand out space like candy...
While it is true that some regions seem to be experiencing a real surge in IPv4 demand recently, it's also important to remember that *all* of the address space is for the Internet community at large, based on documented need, on a first-come, first-serve basis. It's actually "global Internet address space"; this is a fundamental principle of the Internet Registry system as noted in RFC 2050. /John John Curran President and CEO ARIN
On 10/20/10 11:34 AM, John Curran wrote:
On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:47 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote:
Not to stir an already boiling over pot and all, but is there any kind of report or documentation on releasing of space from countries other then the North American region?
You're not going to find a lot of large allocations which are unused in other regions, predominantly because these allocations where made at the earliest time of the Internet to organizations that were mostly in the ARIN region.
True, I didn't take that into account. :)
I'd hate to think that the rest of the world thinks that the US should be the one to give up all their space so that they can continue to hand out space like candy... While it is true that some regions seem to be experiencing a real surge in IPv4 demand recently, it's also important to remember that*all* of the address space is for the Internet community at large, based on documented need, on a first-come, first-serve basis. It's actually "global Internet address space"; this is a fundamental principle of the Internet Registry system as noted in RFC 2050.
Understood, I'm just expressing concern over the current situation of IPv4 exhaustion. As a spam fighter, I tend to see bursts of spam from newly allocated space in various regions which leaves me scratching my head as to why some places keep asking for more space and getting it so easily. -- Brielle Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org
On 20/10/10 17:47, Brielle Bruns wrote:
Not to stir an already boiling over pot and all, but is there any kind of report or documentation on releasing of space from countries other then the North American region?
Really it's mainly US govt agencies, defence contractors, etc from the dawn of the Internet who hold legacy class A space of this type. This space was pre-RIR which means it was not assigned on the same (broadly similar) global policies as the majority of address space in the modern era. On that basis, there's nothing big for other regions to 'give up'. One exception is the UK government with two /8s. http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space/ipv4-address-space.txt http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assigned_/8_IPv4_address_blocks
participants (23)
-
Brandon Ross -
Brielle Bruns -
Christopher Morrow -
David Conrad -
Doug Barton -
Ernie Rubi -
Florian Weimer -
Franck Martin -
Frank Bulk -
Jack Bates -
Jeroen Massar -
Jeroen van Aart -
Joe Maimon -
Joel Esler -
John Curran -
Justin M. Streiner -
Majdi S. Abbas -
Nick Hilliard -
Randy Bush -
Randy Carpenter -
Stephen D. Strowes -
Tony Hain -
Will Hargrave