Re: Stealthy Overlay Network Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block

[Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net>]

I wouldn't say it's unknowable, just that no one with a sufficient enough interest in the cause has been loud enough 
with the research they've done, assuming some research has been done.. 


You don't need everything in the world to support it, just the things "you" use. 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Tom Beecher" <beecher () beecher cc> 
To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog () ics-il net> 
Cc: "Ryan Hamel" <ryan () rkhtech org>, "Abraham Y. Chen" <AYChen () alum mit edu>, nanog () nanog org 
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2024 1:16:53 PM 
Subject: Re: Stealthy Overlay Network Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block 




How far are we from that, in reality? I don't have any intention on using the space, but I would like to put some 
definition to this boogey man. 




It's unknowable really. 


Lots of network software works just fine today with it. Some don't. To my knowledge some NOS vendors have outright 
refused to support 240/4 unless it's reclassified. Beyond network equipment, there is an unknowable number of software 
packages , drivers, etc out in the world which 240/4 is still hardcoded not to work. It's been unfortunate to see this 
fact handwaved away in many discussions on the subject. 


The Mirai worm surfaced in 2016. The software vulnerabilities used in its attack vectors are still unpatched and 
present in massive numbers across the internet; there are countless variants that still use the same methods, 8 years 
later. Other vulnerabilities still exist after multiple decades. But we somehow think devices will be patched to 
support 240/4 quickly? 


It's just unrealistic. 


On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 1:03 PM Mike Hammett < nanog () ics-il net > wrote: 

<blockquote>



" every networking vendor, hardware vendor, and OS vendor" 


How far are we from that, in reality? I don't have any intention on using the space, but I would like to put some 
definition to this boogey man. 




----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 

Midwest Internet Exchange 

The Brothers WISP 



From: "Ryan Hamel" < ryan () rkhtech org > 
To: "Abraham Y. Chen" < aychen () avinta com >, "Vasilenko Eduard" < vasilenko.eduard () huawei com > 
Cc: "Abraham Y. Chen" < AYChen () alum MIT edu >, nanog () nanog org 
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2024 11:04:31 PM 
Subject: Re: Stealthy Overlay Network Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block 


Abraham, 


You may not need permission from the IETF, but you effectively need it from every networking vendor, hardware vendor, 
and OS vendor. If you do not have buy in from key stakeholders, it's dead-on arrival. 



Ryan 

From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+ryan= rkhtech.org () nanog org > on behalf of Abraham Y. Chen < aychen () avinta com > 
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2024 6:38:52 PM 
To: Vasilenko Eduard < vasilenko.eduard () huawei com > 
Cc: Chen, Abraham Y. < AYChen () alum MIT edu >; nanog () nanog org < nanog () nanog org > 
Subject: Stealthy Overlay Network Re: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block 


                
Caution: This is an external email and may be malicious. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. 


Hi, Vasilenko: 


1) ... These “ multi-national conglo ” has enough influence on the IETF to not permit it. ": 


As classified by Vint Cerf, 240/4 enabled EzIP is an overlay network that may be deployed stealthily (just like the 
events reported by the RIPE-LAB). So, EzIP deployment does not need permission from the IETF. 


Regards, 




Abe (2024-01-11 21:38 EST) 









On 2024-01-11 01:17, Vasilenko Eduard wrote: 

<blockquote>


> It has been known that multi-national conglomerates have been using it without announcement. 
This is an assurance that 240/4 would never be permitted for Public Internet. These “ multi-national conglo ” has 
enough influence on the IETF to not permit it. 
Ed/ 



From: NANOG [ mailto:nanog-bounces+vasilenko.eduard=huawei.com () nanog org ] On Behalf Of Abraham Y. Chen 
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 3:35 PM 
To: KARIM MEKKAOUI <amekkaoui () mektel ca> 
Cc: nanog () nanog org ; Chen, Abraham Y. <AYChen () alum MIT edu> 
Subject: 202401100645.AYC Re: IPv4 address block 
Importance: High 


Hi, Karim: 



1) If you have control of your own equipment (I presume that your business includes IAP - Internet Access Provider, 
since you are asking to buy IPv4 blocks.), you can get a large block of reserved IPv4 address for free by disabling the 
program codes in your current facility that has been disabling the use of 240/4 netblock. Please have a look at the 
below whitepaper. Utilized according to the outlined disciplines, this is a practically unlimited resources. It has 
been known that multi-national conglomerates have been using it without announcement. So, you can do so stealthily 
according to the proposed mechanism which establishes uniform practices, just as well. 



https://www.avinta.com/phoenix-1/home/RevampTheInternet.pdf 



2) Being an unorthodox solution, if not controversial, please follow up with me offline. Unless, other NANOGers express 
their interests. 





Regards, 





Abe (2024-01-10 07:34 EST) 







On 2024-01-07 22:46, KARIM MEKKAOUI wrote: 
<blockquote>

Hi Nanog Community 

Any idea please on the best way to buy IPv4 blocs and what is the price? 

Thank you 

KARIM 

</blockquote>




        
        
Virus-free. www.avast.com 

</blockquote>




</blockquote>