Re: Sad IPv4 story?

[Joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>]

On 12/10/11 21:42 , Joel jaeggli wrote:
> On 12/10/11 17:48 , Barry Shein wrote:
> > > > I just had a personal email from a brand new ISP in the Asia-Pacific
> > > > area desperately looking for enough IPv4 to be able to run their
> > > > business the way they would like?
> >
> > This sniping elicited by the above seems inappropriate and
> > unprofessional, the request/anecdote seemed reasonable and could
> > elicit solutions such as partnerships, etc.
>
> engineering solutions work with the constraints at hand.
>
> The maximum ipv4 delegation size to be issued in apnic is a /22. one has
> to assume that when it's gone it's gone.
>
> given that constraint, I know how I'd build it.

Setting aside the sad story part for the moment, Would this be a good
subject for a BOF? Are there others who would be willing to participate
(residendential,transit or dc operators, and potentially vendors of
equipment or address transfer brokers).

I'd call it something like:

IPV4 runout - Doing more with less.

* IPV4 runout means new entrants will from the outset deploy techniques
  the present operators consider undesirable.

* IPV6 should be appearing as part and parcel of new greenfield projects
I would think.

* On the vendor side CGN hardware is becoming a mature product space.

* Datacenter/ICP operators confront a similar set of problems both
supporting outgoing connections for large pools and incoming termination.



>