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

[Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc>]

> 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:

> " 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 <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL>
> <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions>
> <https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange>
> <https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> ------------------------------
> *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:
>
> > 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
> <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> <amekkaoui () mektel ca>
> *Cc:* nanog () nanog org; Chen, Abraham Y. <AYChen () alum MIT edu>
> <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:
>
> Hi Nanog Community
>
>
>
> Any idea please on the best way to buy IPv4 blocs and what is the price?
>
>
>
> Thank you
>
>
>
> KARIM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>
> Virus-free.www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>