New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
There is so much IPv4 out there that wasted, still nobody who could do something about it does care, e.g. 53.0.0.0/8 is only used in the LAN and not routed. And there are many other /8 that are used in the same way.
Anyway v4 is dead long life v6
@jsg: Life ain't fair.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_IPv4_address_allocation
3.1.33.7
First come first serve.
Just because guy A has a smoking hot wife, it doesn't mean you can wed that said girl. Guy A has claimed her in the name of marriage.
1.Create new Internet. 2. PROFIT
So your wife is a public resource?
My approach would be something like 5 IPs per 10 people no matter whether company/institution (5 IPs per 10 employees) or country. Anything beyond that but below 10/10 would need plausible justification except for providers who obviously need more IPs. More than 10/10, except for providers, should be strictly prohibited.
Whole countries behind a few natted IPs vs. some corporations almost drowning in unused IPs must end.
Problem solved, IPv6 not needed.
Of course, all people are publicly available.
Whoever claim them first are the owners.
Edit: Of course, those who are being claimed must agree to be claimed. Well, that's what marriages are for.
This. And that was because in those days we had no CIDR we had classes. Since they needed more than Class B, they were given Class A. As the Internet grew, the wastage was recognised and Classless Inter-Domain Routing was born.
Do note contracts were signed for this stuff. When the RIRs were formed it was acknowledged based on the previous contracts they assumed as part of being the RIR that they did not have the ability to regulate those ranges.
Even then, RIRs like ARIN are regulated by their existing members. It is unlikely any member would vote for that.
Bullshit legacy allocations. That is all.
I get your point and you are right. But: then there was no IP shortage.
Technology has changed (e.g. classes -> CIDR) and the situation has changed (gravely). We must adapt.
And again, GE selling their /8 clearly shows that GE did not need that huge pool of IPs. So we can reasonably assume that many large /8 to /16 chunks can be freed.
GE would have no incentive to re-number if GE wouldn't have been able to monetise the asset. That's the sad truth. They could continue to use this space and it would have never been available to the market.
Same goes for transfers within and between RIRs. The source clearly doesn't need the space any more, yet lawyers smarter than us clearly see an issue with 'nationalising' assets that are privately owned without compensation, hence why this will continue.
Further to that, no one should concern themselves with the IPv4 scraps. Even 10 /8s wouldn't help in the mid-term if LIRs were to be assigned anything more than /22 again. What engineers, governments and businesses should be concerned with is how to drive the IPv6 adoption to 100%...
All I see there is a broken system. In a healthy system no corporation would have a chance to think in terms of monetizing public resources.
Well, a lot of scraps add up to quite many IPs. Looking at the list linked by @angstrom I see whole countries who could greatly benefit even from scraps. Being at that and for orientation: A /8 is about 24 mio IPs. That is more than about 90% of all countries on this planet have! Only 18 out of about 195 countries have more IPs than GE had!!
As for IPv6 I strongly disagree. There's a reason for IPv6 slow and hesitating uptake: it's sh_t, complete sh_t. That starts with the simplistic dumb "let's do it really really big this time" approach and doesn't end with technical stupidity like the fact that dealing with 128 bit entries very much drives up cost (when processors still and for some time to come are 64-bit). The fact that they changed well known and established mechanisms (like DHCP) too also doesn't help.
We've seen "This is the IPv6 year!" now for over a decade and it always was but hot air. And that's not going to change soon.
Btw and for orientation: a much better, more reasonable, and easier to digest "IPv5a" with 64-bit IPs would still offer half of todays IP space to each and every human alive.
Evidently that whole IP thing should come into responsible and professional hands. The ones who were in charge (way too long) have completely failed and f_cked up pretty much everything they touched.
Sue them. You do have a case.
They were unable to predict the future. How dare they.
As often you offer thoughtless BS.
In fact I clearly said that humans can err and it's understandable that back then they made some poor predictions.
But later it was - provably - understood to be a problem and e.g. CIDR came to be used. My accusation is not that their early prediction were wrong. My accusation is that they didn't repair and correct the situation and mechanisms adequately although there were chances and possibilities.
Or, shorter, my accusation is that for decades they worked around one holy cow which is the insane allocations for some corporations and institutions.
Instead of addressing a real very major cause of IP shortage they gave us a creepy and expensive monstrosity, IPv6.
My BS is short. Your BS is too long.
That's the difference.
You easily make up for that by very frequent posts. Don't worry.
And yes, of course technical facts (128 bit with 64-bit processors) and facts like "1 corporation alone having more IPs than a couple of countries at the bottome end" is BS and can't stand next to your brillant observations ...
Bah, just say "Fu U" and be done with it. Darn it. Why waste 3 lines?
They might have thought about networking the various appliances and industrial equipment they make. Millions to billions of things.
That might indeed be what they wanted resp. why they wanted a /8.
My point however is why they actually got - and could keep - the /8.
Why does the Prudential Insurance Company of America have 48.0.0.0/8 ?
GE at least had some department of defense contracts.
Damn.
For someone so concerned about precious resources, the guy really wastes memory and bandwidth.
Reminds me of someone else that used to be here and liked to argue.
Yes, you are right. GE just so happened to be the large corporation in the headlines.
I guess the situation is roughly the same. Just like GE Prudential certainly had reasons to want a /8 but again my point is why they actually got it and could keep it.
Are you sure that you want to put IPs which really are increasingly scarce next to memory and bandwidth which are plentiful and tend to get cheaper?
And btw, I don't care because bandwidth (well the fibers) unlike IPs actually are produced, layed, and run by companies and hence it seems fine to me if those companies buy and sell and make a profit.
@jsg is a commie bastard who hates freedom.
You forgot "white male racist". Isn't that the current obliteration formula?
Seriously, you are wrong. I'm in fact a rather conservative guy but I'm also a quite technical and practically minded guy. So it annoys me that we are running out of IPs but those in charge come up with an idiotic non-solution nightmare (IPv6) while at the same time protecting insanely large IP pools for a few corporations and institutions.
You see I often work on server code and since quite some years I'm confronted with a lot of problems related to IPv6, dual stacks/address formats, and the like. So I obviously start to think about that problem. That is what drives me and not "right" or "left" or "communism" nor am I anti-capitalism (or otherwise particularly political). Like many developers much of my thinking and discussing is motivated by professional itching and idiocy that makes my work harder.
The thing with the countries came up in my mind along the line "If we can ask countries with 100 mio people to live with a couple of /24 shouldn't GE, Prudential, and others be able to live (pretty well for that matter) with say a /16?"
The defeat of communism happened in 1991, at the Metallica concert in Moscow:
Ipv6: coming 'soon' to all EC2 instance types
Sorry,
I can’t agree: he is totally right in that there is 0 reason why IPs need to be something you own instead of something you are given for use, like the numbers on a license plate.
It wouldn’t even make a big difference in practice: just add one small rule „the
number of IPs the user had been given will be checked every 5 years. If you use less than 50% of what you were assigned, then 25% (half of what you have spare) is taken back and assigned to someone else.“
Poof.
Done.
Over time things would sort themselves out.
This is certainly not „communist“.
BUT: they guy goes on my nerves because he talks too much and because he doesn’t understand that it’s always easier to see the weaknesses of a concept in hindsight.
DHCP