[125036] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Herrin)
Thu Apr 8 15:17:08 2010
In-Reply-To: <20100408183757.GA9681@vacation.karoshi.com.>
From: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 15:14:50 -0400
To: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:37 PM, <bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 02:22:29PM -0400, William Herrin wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Mr. James W. Laferriere
>> > =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Try that fee while trying to make a living in a depress=
ed econimic
>> > region JUST for an ipv4 /24 Assignment . =A0I don't make enough to cov=
er that
>>
>> Not much sympathy for folks crying the blues about the cost of an
>> address assignment that they're going to turn around and announce into
>> the DFZ...
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0assuming facts not in evidence there ... but ok.
Hi Bill,
If you're not planning to announce a route into the DFZ, we have
RFC1918 or IPv6's ULA, address pools that are 100% and completely free
for your use.
>> ARIN has implemented a structure to facilitate IPv4 address transfers
>> should an open market come to exist. Between an address market and the
>> ever more creative use of NAT, it should be possible for IPv4
>> addressing to continue after free pool depletion as a zero-sum game.
>> Exactly how long is a matter of debate with speculation ranging from
>> months to decades.
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0cool. =A0I've used the transfer policy with limited succes=
s.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0I guess the interesting thing in your statement (and I sus=
pect
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0a trip to the ARIN NRPM is in order) is "should an open ma=
rket
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0come into existence" ... how do you see that happening?
eBay?
Given a demand and a supply, markets don't traditionally need a whole
lot of help to come into being.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0but more to my point. =A0If I'm using a single /24 out of =
my /20
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(using an antiquated example) - would there be:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0) interest in the other 15 /24s
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0) how would that interest be expressed (so I would know ab=
out it)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0) complaints from the folks running w/o default about
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0the new prefixes on offer? =A0**
The basic plan (ARIN NRPM section 8.3) is:
1. Request and be approved for addresses from ARIN (even though ARIN
won't have any addresses to give).
2. Find (pay) someone who has ARIN-managed addresses that they're
willing to give up in the quantity you want.
3. Current holder releases addresses to ARIN in the requested (paid)
quantity with instructions to provide those addresses to the
already-authorized recipient (in #1).
4. ARIN updates the registration accordingly.
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Dorn Hetzel <dhetzel@gmail.com> wrote:
> If there was an automatic website that just handed out up to a /40 on
> demand, and charged a one-time fee of $100, I don't think the space would
> ever be exhausted, there isn't enough money.
137 billion prefixes would crush the DFZ routers of course, but as we
all know the routing table isn't ARIN's lookout. :-P
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>> ARIN's unilateral right under the LRSA to reclaim my addresses in the
>> event of a dispute bugs me a tad, as does similar verbiage sprinkled
>> throughout.
>
> Let's clarify here, however...
> Nothing guarantees you that ARIN can not do so if you don't have any
> contract with them.
Owen,
Your uneducated YANAL opinion about the governing law in the matter is
duly noted and filed beside my own differing viewpoint. Until and
unless ARIN attempts to forcibly reclaim a block of legacy addresses
from its legacy holder, the question remains theoretical.
> The point being that
> while I think continuing to provide a free ride to IPv4 legacy holders
> is a good idea, there is no reason to continue that concept into the
> IPv6 world.
The reason is that it could be structured to increase the rate of IPv6
deployment, to the benefit of all. To what degree that would achieve
value for cost is debatable, but it certainly qualifies as more than
"no reason."
Regards,
Bill Herrin
--=20
William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
