Re: NANOG Digest, Vol 33, Issue 91

[Rudolph Daniel <rudi.daniel () gmail com>]

We all are waiving flags about the return of one solitary /8 to ARIN, (which
is a good thing)  but should we not waive flags about new v6 networks too?

Let us waive the flags also for the v6 adopters...I think we need to
evangelize v6 even more than we are already doing.

RD



> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:27:41 -0400
> From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
> Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of
>        45/8    address block
> To: Joel Esler <joel.esler () me com>
> Cc: John Curran <jcurran () arin net>, "nanog () nanog org"
>        <nanog () nanog org>
> Message-ID:
>        <AANLkTin4P826POmny_rNZvSZowkNih7zN1LMiFhAYQKN () mail gmail com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:28:44 -0400
> From: John Curran <jcurran () arin net>
> Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of
>        45/8    address block
> To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
> Cc: "nanog () nanog org Operators Group" <nanog () nanog org>
> Message-ID: <EBF47E07-EDC2-47F7-89EE-5D2165A741EF () arin net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:29:58 -0400
> From: Curtis Maurand <cmaurand () xyonet com>
> Subject: Re: Recommendations for Metro-Ethernet Equipment
> To: nanog () nanog org
> Message-ID: <4CBF0AF6.9030207 () xyonet com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>  I'd add Alcatel to that list.
>
> On 10/20/2010 11:24 AM, Eric Merkel wrote:
> > I've been tasked with making a recommendation for the core and access
> > equipment for a small metro-ethernet network. We're probably talking at
> max
> > 200-300 subs split between two termination points. Most customers will
> > probably be at speeds of 100M or less. We'd like the backbone to be 10G
> and
> > be MPLS capable. That being said some of the companies we've been looking
> at
> > are
> >
> >
> >
> > Cisco
> >
> > Extreme
> >
> > Brocade
> >
> > Adtran
> >
> > Occam
> >
> > Zhone
> >
> >
> >
> > We're looking to build the network in a cost effective manner so we're
> not
> > opposed to doing using aftermarket or refurbished equipment but we don't
> > want to start off with equipment that has no future of expanding.
> >
> >
> >
> > Any suggestions, success or horror stories are appreciated. ;)
> >
> >
> >
> > Eric
> >
> >
> >
> > =====
> >
> > Eric Merkel
> >
> > MetaLINK Technologies, Inc.
> >
> > Email: merkel at metalink.net
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:33:01 -0400
> From: John Curran <jcurran () arin net>
> Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of
>        45/8    address block
> To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
> Cc: "nanog () nanog org Operators Group" <nanog () nanog org>
> Message-ID: <BB969AF1-E6DC-4E71-B3D7-A56DABDEB24B () arin net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:35:19 -0400
> From: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
> Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of
>        45/8    address block
> To: John Curran <jcurran () arin net>
> Cc: "nanog () nanog org Operators Group" <nanog () nanog org>
> Message-ID:
>        <AANLkTimgWaS1Vk+WVeXDEkL8srCBE6wxEpLOaV8Ez1Hv () mail gmail 
> com<AANLkTimgWaS1Vk%2BWVeXDEkL8srCBE6wxEpLOaV8Ez1Hv () mail gmail com>
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:37:55 -0400
> From: John Curran <jcurran () arin net>
> Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of
>        45/8    address block
> To: Jeroen Massar <jeroen () unfix org>
> Cc: "nanog () nanog org Operators Group" <nanog () nanog org>
> Message-ID: <CC71D159-C46E-49C7-9A8B-6A99508CCB89 () arin net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:40:57 -0400
> From: John Curran <jcurran () arin net>
> Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of
>        45/8    address block
> To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
> Cc: "nanog () nanog org Operators Group" <nanog () nanog org>
> Message-ID: <DBBFDC71-10D2-45CE-86C5-08496337CD02 () arin net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> 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
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:45:20 -0400
> From: Joe Maimon <jmaimon () ttec com>
> Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of
>        45/8    address block
> To: Christopher Morrow <morrowc.lists () gmail com>
> Cc: John Curran <jcurran () arin net>, "nanog () nanog org"
>        <nanog () nanog org>
> Message-ID: <4CBF0E90.6070403 () ttec com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:02:16 -0400
> From: Francois Menard <francois () menards ca>
> Subject: Re: Recommendations for Metro-Ethernet Equipment
> To: Curtis Maurand <cmaurand () xyonet com>
> Cc: nanog () nanog org
> Message-ID: <B861A05D-DB46-4E45-8818-A6C0C6356DB1 () menards ca>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> We just bought a fair amount of MRV Optiswitches for that same purpose.
>
> F.
>
> On 2010-10-20, at 11:29 AM, Curtis Maurand wrote:
>
> > I'd add Alcatel to that list.
> >
> > On 10/20/2010 11:24 AM, Eric Merkel wrote:
> > > I've been tasked with making a recommendation for the core and access
> > > equipment for a small metro-ethernet network. We're probably talking at
> max
> > > 200-300 subs split between two termination points. Most customers will
> > > probably be at speeds of 100M or less. We'd like the backbone to be 10G
> and
> > > be MPLS capable. That being said some of the companies we've been
> looking at
> > > are
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Cisco
> > >
> > > Extreme
> > >
> > > Brocade
> > >
> > > Adtran
> > >
> > > Occam
> > >
> > > Zhone
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We're looking to build the network in a cost effective manner so we're
> not
> > > opposed to doing using aftermarket or refurbished equipment but we don't
> > > want to start off with equipment that has no future of expanding.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Any suggestions, success or horror stories are appreciated. ;)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Eric
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > =====
> > >
> > > Eric Merkel
> > >
> > > MetaLINK Technologies, Inc.
> > >
> > > Email: merkel at metalink.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:03:46 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner () cluebyfour org>
> Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of
>        45/8    address block
> To: "nanog () nanog org" <nanog () nanog org>
> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1010201154270.17786 () whammy cluebyfour org>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
> 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
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 12:04:29 -0400
> From: Ernie Rubi <ernesto () cs fiu edu>
> Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of
>        45/8    address block
> To: Joe Maimon <jmaimon () ttec com>
> Cc: John Curran <jcurran () arin net>, "nanog () nanog org"
>        <nanog () nanog org>
> Message-ID: <107A762E-D0A0-4CBA-92D8-376FCD6E266B () cs fiu edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
> NANOG () nanog org
> https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
>
> End of NANOG Digest, Vol 33, Issue 91
> *************************************



-- 

Rudi Daniel
*danielcharles 
consulting<http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kingstown-Saint-Vincent-and-the-Grenadines/DanielCharles/153611257984774>
**1-784 498 8277<http://www.facebook.com/pages/Kingstown-Saint-Vincent-and-the-Grenadines/DanielCharles/153611257984774>
*
*
*