Source: http://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/news/ripe-ncc-begins-to-allocate-i... NCC Begins to Allocate IPv4 Address Space From the Last /8 14 Sep 2012 On Friday 14 September, 2012, the RIPE NCC, the Regional Internet Registry (RIR) for Europe, the Middle East and parts of Central Asia, distributed the last blocks of IPv4 address space from the available pool. This means that we are now distributing IPv4 address space to Local Internet Registries (LIRs) from the last /8<http://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/ipv4-exhaustion> according tosection 5.6 of "IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region <http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv4-policies>". This section states that an LIR may receive one /22 allocation (1,024 IPv4 addresses), even if they can justify a larger allocation. This /22 allocation will only be made to LIRs if they have already received an IPv6 allocation from an upstream LIR or the RIPE NCC. No new IPv4 Provider Independent (PI) space will be assigned. It is now imperative that all stakeholders deploy IPv6 on their networks to ensure the continuity of their online operations and the future growth of the Internet. To see the Impact of RIPENCC reaching the last /8, see: http://www.ripe.net/internet-coordination/ipv4-exhaustion/faq On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 3:58 PM, McTim <dogwallah@gmail.com> wrote:

Except this does not mean "empty" it means ~16 Million left (one /8).

-- Cheers,

McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:

...

RIPE says the cupboard is empty on them now....

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/09/europe-officially-runs...)

...

- Carlton

============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851

As the article made quite clear, they're into the last /8, but they are months if not at least a year away from running out. Due to the way that space is reclaimed and reallocated, they'll probably continue to have some even after this /8 is given out. If they were a more careful about who they give space to, they'd have even more. (RIPE has a big problem with fake LIRs run by crooks.)

It is now imperative that all stakeholders deploy IPv6 on their networks to ensure the continuity of their online operations and the future growth of the Internet.

Eventually IPv6 will work, I have v6 tunnels into my server and into my home LAN, but it's still surprisingly not ready for prime time, particularly in applications like mail and IM that have abuse management issues. Close to half of all the allocated IPv4 space is not routed on the public Internet. Once the free stuff runs out, there will be lots available for sale, and since there's so much, the price is not likely to be very high, perhaps $1/address in moderate sized chunks. Before anyone points out how evil it is to charge for addresses, everything you do to get online costs some money, adding IPv6 capability is not free, either the technical upgrades or the staff training, and it can be entirely reasonable and cost effective to buy some IPv4 instead. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly

Weeeeeellllll, you got it! Give the man a prize. You had to read the story to see how the hype is undermined. Quite frankly, the whole thing always brings me back to that Y2K jingle. Um, well....let me leave it there. -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:58 PM, McTim <dogwallah@gmail.com> wrote:

Except this does not mean "empty" it means ~16 Million left (one /8).

-- Cheers,

McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:

...

RIPE says the cupboard is empty on them now....

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/09/europe-officially-runs...)

...

- Carlton

============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

Hi Sala: You misinterpret my skepticism as denial. Wrong. I'm there with you on all the facts you quote. Yes too, on all the trends you finger. My skepticism is born of the big 'the sky is falling' hoopla. And an analysis that is predicated on immediate and/or imminent scarcity. [Scarcity as in demand driven!] For the last several years, I've studiously followed the ARIN policy discussions. Its only after you see the details and couple that to a few other facts that it jumps out at ya; the details just don't support the great alarm hurry-up-and-do-this. Look critically at some of the data in context of where access and demand are growing; Africa and Asia. Then have another think. No, we will not have a collapse anytime soon. No, I doubt if IPv4 addresses will ever be totally exhausted. At least not if some of the policy positions I see being promoted in the ARIN region are implemented! Yes, if and when that time comes, if someone belly up to your favourite RIR and asks for a **bank* *of addresses, here's the likely response, "well, we ain't got that kind. But here's another kind works just as well if not better! Machine you have might even be prepped for it, see. But you might have to do a few little things to let her fly". That conversation will not take place with a mom and pop operation, trust me. End user networks are not provisioned as the popular myth says. Troll the lists and you will see this is one topic I've studiously stayed away from. Not because I don't understand the issues; I ran service provisioning businesses absolutely dependent on ready availability of IP addresses. It is because I remain underwhelmed by the hype. The facts tend to the inconvenient. To the hype, that is. So we are agreed to disagree, albeit agreeably. Nope, the hype on this is over the top. And for the life of me I can't figure out why. In the Y2K storm I knew what it was; there were folks hellbent on picking some pockets. Maybe its because I am at a point where I've learned to distrust all revealed wisdom and orthodoxy. So I might be the heretic here. Oh well, if salvation comes...... - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:

Snip the whole thing always brings me back to that Y2K jingle.

I would disagree and here's why.

*Demographics* As I write this email, the world's population according to the Population Reference Bureau is 7,087,683,026 as at 6:18am Sunday morning on 16th September, 2012. The World Mortality Report of 2011 rates (produced by the Department of Economic Social Affairs by its Population division) shows that over time the mortality rates have generally gone down although there are still wide disparities in levels of mortality across regions. See:

http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/worldmortalityreport2011/World...

*End Users* Whilst there are 7 billion people on the planet, the World Internet Statistics (IWS) suggest that there are 2,267,233,742 internet users as at December, 31, 2011. See: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm.

These users distributed would be something like this:- AFRALO region - 6.2% APRALO region - 49% EURALO region - 22.1% LACRALO region - 10.4% NARALO region - 12%

*Can current supply meet demand?* As the push for Universal Service continues to grow as we have seen from recent trends in ICT development, liberalisation of markets, competition, it is generally expected that the end users will grow. There already is a demand on Internet Address allocations based on consumption. The pull on address spaces is also linked to "consumerism". The innovations in science and technology have brought us smart phones, smart computers, smart refrigerators, smart homes, smart cars means that there is a "level of demand" coming from the globe on a "finite pool of resources". We see trends where as Innovations increase eg. Applications (App) and a single phone can have an average of 5 Apps. Internet Traffic is definitely growing because of many reasons, the desire to communicate, content driven applications being some of the reasons. Whether it is an entrepreneur away on a business trip can with a few strokes be able to check procurement of goods, what's in the cash register etc or a Surgeon performing remote tests and/or surgery, one thing is certain, consumption of the Internet will continue to grow.

So the issue becomes, can "Supply meet demand"? Maybe and only for a little while. There are Network Address Translators (NATs) that can only do so much for a little while but all it is really at the end of the day is buying time and waiting for the inevitable which is the pool of IPv4 resources will run out.

*The growth in global demand to communicate implies the need for transition* For as long as the assumption is true that internet usage will grow there will be a strain on the address allocation. There are variables that affect demographics droughts, tsunamis, global food crisis, water scarcity, climate change, migration, conflicts and wars that affect demographics but a steward and in this case RIPE NCC will try to ensure that there is sufficient preparation that existing resources are conserved within reason and at the same time encourage transition.

The threat aside from running out of internet addresses on the IPv4 front is the ability for Networks not to be able to communicate. The IPv4 Network cannot communicate with the IPv6 and there are ways to address these where network owners can elect to opt for which ever methods of transition suits them.

Fortunately, the good news is that to be able to account for the current and future demands on address space allocations, the IPv6 address allocations were designed to enable seamless communication. So the only challenge now is organising IPv4 to IPv6 transition. The key word is a transition. As for end users there are many things that we can do as ordinary end users to help prepare for the transition but that is for another time.

Whilst some may say, that it's just vendors trying to sell their wares. The reality is that vendors will always try to sell their wares and you can help keep them accountable by getting your region and network providers to publish feedback on their wares See:

http://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/ipv6-cpe-survey-updated-january-2011/?se...

Best Regards, Sala _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en

Hi Carlton There is a twist to the IPv4/v6 discussion - and it's about money (surprise!) Geoff Huston (our own internet pioneer/guru) asks why the carriers aren't migrating to v6 - and instead dealing with the address shortage (at least in the APNIC region) through NATing. As he explains, with NATing, the carriers gain information about what IP addresses are going where - information they can flog to advertisers. It's part of the money shift from the carriers in an analogue, circuit switched world where the carriers got the money, to an IP world where they are missing out and the revenue is going to the content providers. (the WCIT issue about accounting rates no longer providing the carriers with the money they used to collect is relevant here). So the carriers are making do with NATing instead of migrating to the v6 world where, once again, one IP address connects directly to another address and no NATting (and no collecting information about users) in between between (except in the usual circumstances of corporates, etc) Holly On 16/09/2012, at 6:11 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote:

Hi Sala: You misinterpret my skepticism as denial. Wrong.

I'm there with you on all the facts you quote. Yes too, on all the trends you finger. My skepticism is born of the big 'the sky is falling' hoopla. And an analysis that is predicated on immediate and/or imminent scarcity. [Scarcity as in demand driven!]

For the last several years, I've studiously followed the ARIN policy discussions. Its only after you see the details and couple that to a few other facts that it jumps out at ya; the details just don't support the great alarm hurry-up-and-do-this. Look critically at some of the data in context of where access and demand are growing; Africa and Asia. Then have another think.

No, we will not have a collapse anytime soon. No, I doubt if IPv4 addresses will ever be totally exhausted. At least not if some of the policy positions I see being promoted in the ARIN region are implemented!

Yes, if and when that time comes, if someone belly up to your favourite RIR and asks for a **bank* *of addresses, here's the likely response, "well, we ain't got that kind. But here's another kind works just as well if not better! Machine you have might even be prepped for it, see. But you might have to do a few little things to let her fly". That conversation will not take place with a mom and pop operation, trust me. End user networks are not provisioned as the popular myth says.

Troll the lists and you will see this is one topic I've studiously stayed away from. Not because I don't understand the issues; I ran service provisioning businesses absolutely dependent on ready availability of IP addresses. It is because I remain underwhelmed by the hype.

The facts tend to the inconvenient. To the hype, that is. So we are agreed to disagree, albeit agreeably. Nope, the hype on this is over the top. And for the life of me I can't figure out why. In the Y2K storm I knew what it was; there were folks hellbent on picking some pockets.

Maybe its because I am at a point where I've learned to distrust all revealed wisdom and orthodoxy. So I might be the heretic here. Oh well, if salvation comes......

- Carlton

============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Snip the whole thing always brings me back to that Y2K jingle.

I would disagree and here's why.

*Demographics* As I write this email, the world's population according to the Population Reference Bureau is 7,087,683,026 as at 6:18am Sunday morning on 16th September, 2012. The World Mortality Report of 2011 rates (produced by the Department of Economic Social Affairs by its Population division) shows that over time the mortality rates have generally gone down although there are still wide disparities in levels of mortality across regions. See:

http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/worldmortalityreport2011/World...

*End Users* Whilst there are 7 billion people on the planet, the World Internet Statistics (IWS) suggest that there are 2,267,233,742 internet users as at December, 31, 2011. See: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm.

These users distributed would be something like this:- AFRALO region - 6.2% APRALO region - 49% EURALO region - 22.1% LACRALO region - 10.4% NARALO region - 12%

*Can current supply meet demand?* As the push for Universal Service continues to grow as we have seen from recent trends in ICT development, liberalisation of markets, competition, it is generally expected that the end users will grow. There already is a demand on Internet Address allocations based on consumption. The pull on address spaces is also linked to "consumerism". The innovations in science and technology have brought us smart phones, smart computers, smart refrigerators, smart homes, smart cars means that there is a "level of demand" coming from the globe on a "finite pool of resources". We see trends where as Innovations increase eg. Applications (App) and a single phone can have an average of 5 Apps. Internet Traffic is definitely growing because of many reasons, the desire to communicate, content driven applications being some of the reasons. Whether it is an entrepreneur away on a business trip can with a few strokes be able to check procurement of goods, what's in the cash register etc or a Surgeon performing remote tests and/or surgery, one thing is certain, consumption of the Internet will continue to grow.

So the issue becomes, can "Supply meet demand"? Maybe and only for a little while. There are Network Address Translators (NATs) that can only do so much for a little while but all it is really at the end of the day is buying time and waiting for the inevitable which is the pool of IPv4 resources will run out.

*The growth in global demand to communicate implies the need for transition* For as long as the assumption is true that internet usage will grow there will be a strain on the address allocation. There are variables that affect demographics droughts, tsunamis, global food crisis, water scarcity, climate change, migration, conflicts and wars that affect demographics but a steward and in this case RIPE NCC will try to ensure that there is sufficient preparation that existing resources are conserved within reason and at the same time encourage transition.

The threat aside from running out of internet addresses on the IPv4 front is the ability for Networks not to be able to communicate. The IPv4 Network cannot communicate with the IPv6 and there are ways to address these where network owners can elect to opt for which ever methods of transition suits them.

Fortunately, the good news is that to be able to account for the current and future demands on address space allocations, the IPv6 address allocations were designed to enable seamless communication. So the only challenge now is organising IPv4 to IPv6 transition. The key word is a transition. As for end users there are many things that we can do as ordinary end users to help prepare for the transition but that is for another time.

Whilst some may say, that it's just vendors trying to sell their wares. The reality is that vendors will always try to sell their wares and you can help keep them accountable by getting your region and network providers to publish feedback on their wares See:

http://labs.ripe.net/Members/mirjam/ipv6-cpe-survey-updated-january-2011/?se...

Best Regards, Sala _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

As he explains, with NATing, the carriers gain information about what IP addresses are going where - information they can flog to advertisers.

This argument makes no sense. A snoopy ISP could as easily collect this information from non-NAT routers as from NAT boxes. In Australia, I would have thought that privacy laws would make selling that kind of information illegal. In the US they use noxious services like phorm to collect and sell info, no NAT needed. R's, John

These are the transcripts (easy reading) of what Geoff Huston said at the APNIC 32 Opening Plenary in Bussan, South Korea. I was in the audience and enjoyed it, see: http://meetings.apnic.net/32/program/opening-plenary/transcript [#Transition from IPv4 to IPv6 #Google #NATs #Access ] These are links to some of Geoff's papers: - On the Content economy, his views published on his website in 2001, see: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2001-06/2001-06-content.html - On Carriage v Content, his views published on his website in July, 2012, see: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-07/carriagevcontent.html. He talks briefly about ITRs and ETNO proposal in relation to the ITRs On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net>wrote:

Hi John

I can't verify Geoff's technical explanation, but he did work for Telstra as one of their star technical people and he is chief scientist with APNIC. And I did use the term carrier but, to be more precise, ISPs in this country are also carriers - which may not be the case in other legislative regimes. As to privacy, the other point Geoff makes is that what is happening is contrary to the Interception legislation - or should be considered so. The difficulty with privacy legislation (not just in Australia) is the definition of 'personal information' which is the lynchpin of whether or not privacy has been breached. Does it include phone numbers and IP addresses. There are suggested amendments to the privacy legislation here that would, in essence, include information - that combined with other information, can identify a person (paraphrased) But one of the privacy issues is how personal information - that which is being protected - is defined.

HOlly On 17/09/2012, at 2:42 AM, John R. Levine wrote:

...

...

As he explains, with NATing, the carriers gain information about what IP addresses are going where - information they can flog to advertisers.

This argument makes no sense. A snoopy ISP could as easily collect this information from non-NAT routers as from NAT boxes.

In Australia, I would have thought that privacy laws would make selling that kind of information illegal. In the US they use noxious services like phorm to collect and sell info, no NAT needed.

R's, John_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 11:04 AM, McTim <dogwallah@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sunday, September 16, 2012, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:

...

These are the transcripts (easy reading) of what Geoff Huston said at the APNIC 32 Opening Plenary in Bussan, South Korea. I was in the audience and enjoyed it, see:

http://meetings.apnic.net/32/program/opening-plenary/transcript[#Transition

...

from IPv4 to IPv6 #Google #NATs #Access ]

I listened to this in real time....it doesn't contain the theory that holly described...neither do the links below.

I had sent these links before I read your email McTim . Holly would be the best person to provide a reference or link, the other better option is to invite Geoff to have a chat about this. I will send him an email offline and ask whether he's published his views on it.

Rgds,

McTim m

mcT

...

These are links to some of Geoff's papers:

- On the Content economy, his views published on his website in 2001, see: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2001-06/2001-06-content.html - On Carriage v Content, his views published on his website in July, 2012, see:

http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-07/carriagevcontent.html

...

. He talks briefly about ITRs and ETNO proposal in relation to the ITRs

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net <javascript:;>

...

wrote:

...

Hi John

I can't verify Geoff's technical explanation, but he did work for Telstra as one of their star technical people and he is chief scientist with APNIC. And I did use the term carrier but, to be more precise, ISPs in this country are also carriers - which may not be the case in other legislative regimes. As to privacy, the other point Geoff makes is that what is happening is contrary to the Interception legislation - or should be considered so. The difficulty with privacy legislation (not just in Australia) is the definition of 'personal information' which is the lynchpin of whether or not privacy has been breached. Does it include phone numbers and IP addresses. There are suggested amendments to the privacy legislation here that would, in essence, include information - that combined with other information, can identify a person (paraphrased) But one of the privacy issues is how personal information - that which is being protected - is defined.

HOlly On 17/09/2012, at 2:42 AM, John R. Levine wrote:

...

...

As he explains, with NATing, the carriers gain information about what IP addresses are going where - information they can flog to advertisers.

This argument makes no sense. A snoopy ISP could as easily collect this information from non-NAT routers as from NAT boxes.

In Australia, I would have thought that privacy laws would make selling that kind of information illegal. In the US they use noxious services like phorm to collect and sell info, no NAT needed.

R's, John_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org <javascript:;> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org <javascript:;> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji

Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org <javascript:;> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- Cheers,

McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851

Interesting discussion, this. Thank to Sala and Holly for the additional sources. Some of my intuit have been reinforced and some new insights formulated. For the record, I started by career at AT&T just around the time of Final Modified Judgment; 1984. Thanks to their training programs, I received an excellent grounding in the business. They also paid for my grad school... - Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net>wrote:

Hi Tim

The best place to go is Geoff's own website <http://www.potaroo.net/> One of his articles does talk about the money shift from the carriers to content service providers. For those who attended his (and my_ session in the APrIGF in Tokyo, this was exactly what he said. (He then spend a bit of time over a breakfast with me the next day, further explaining it.) I"m sure he'd be happy to elaborate.

Holly On 17/09/2012, at 9:04 AM, McTim wrote:

...

On Sunday, September 16, 2012, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:

...

These are the transcripts (easy reading) of what Geoff Huston said at the APNIC 32 Opening Plenary in Bussan, South Korea. I was in the audience and enjoyed it, see:

http://meetings.apnic.net/32/program/opening-plenary/transcript[#Transition

...

from IPv4 to IPv6 #Google #NATs #Access ]

I listened to this in real time....it doesn't contain the theory that holly described...neither do the links below.

Rgds,

McTim m

mcT

...

These are links to some of Geoff's papers:

- On the Content economy, his views published on his website in 2001, see: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2001-06/2001-06-content.html - On Carriage v Content, his views published on his website in July, 2012, see:

http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-07/carriagevcontent.html

...

. He talks briefly about ITRs and ETNO proposal in relation to the ITRs

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Holly Raiche < h.raiche@internode.on.net<javascript:;>

...

wrote:

...

Hi John

I can't verify Geoff's technical explanation, but he did work for Telstra as one of their star technical people and he is chief scientist with APNIC. And I did use the term carrier but, to be more precise, ISPs in this country are also carriers - which may not be the case in other legislative regimes. As to privacy, the other point Geoff makes is that what is happening is contrary to the Interception legislation - or should be considered so. The difficulty with privacy legislation (not just in Australia) is the definition of 'personal information' which is the lynchpin of whether or not privacy has been breached. Does it include phone numbers and IP addresses. There are suggested amendments to the privacy legislation here that would, in essence, include information - that combined with other information, can identify a person (paraphrased) But one of the privacy issues is how personal information - that which is being protected - is defined.

HOlly On 17/09/2012, at 2:42 AM, John R. Levine wrote:

...

...

As he explains, with NATing, the carriers gain information about what IP addresses are going where - information they can flog to advertisers.

This argument makes no sense. A snoopy ISP could as easily collect this information from non-NAT routers as from NAT boxes.

In Australia, I would have thought that privacy laws would make selling that kind of information illegal. In the US they use noxious services like phorm to collect and sell info, no NAT needed.

R's, John_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org <javascript:;> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org <javascript:;> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji

Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org <javascript:;> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- Cheers,

McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

Hi You should also listen to the panel on the Two Sided Economy - where Geoff (after my presentation) talked about the cost issues. Dr Pepper (he was the communications advisor to Clinton) is also on the panel and very interesting. Holly On 17/09/2012, at 8:33 PM, William Drake wrote:

Hi

Geoff made the same argument on a panel we were on together at the Asia Pacific IGF in Tokyo in July (organized by Kuo Wei). Bob Pepper was on the same panel and his head almost exploded, which if memory serves led to some interesting exchanges. Video and transcripts at http://2012.rigf.asia/videotranscript/ and the session was called The future of Internet : Where we go? and how?

Best

Bill

On Sep 16, 2012, at 11:18 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:

...

On Sunday, September 16, 2012, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:

...

These are the transcripts (easy reading) of what Geoff Huston said at the APNIC 32 Opening Plenary in Bussan, South Korea. I was in the audience and enjoyed it, see: http://meetings.apnic.net/32/program/opening-plenary/transcript[#Transition from IPv4 to IPv6 #Google #NATs #Access ]

I listened to this in real time....it doesn't contain the theory that holly described...neither do the links below.

Rgds,

McTim m

mcT

...

These are links to some of Geoff's papers:

- On the Content economy, his views published on his website in 2001, see: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2001-06/2001-06-content.html - On Carriage v Content, his views published on his website in July, 2012, see: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-07/carriagevcontent.html . He talks briefly about ITRs and ETNO proposal in relation to the ITRs

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 8:36 AM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net<javascript:;>

...

wrote:

...

Hi John

I can't verify Geoff's technical explanation, but he did work for Telstra as one of their star technical people and he is chief scientist with APNIC. And I did use the term carrier but, to be more precise, ISPs in this country are also carriers - which may not be the case in other legislative regimes. As to privacy, the other point Geoff makes is that what is happening is contrary to the Interception legislation - or should be considered so. The difficulty with privacy legislation (not just in Australia) is the definition of 'personal information' which is the lynchpin of whether or not privacy has been breached. Does it include phone numbers and IP addresses. There are suggested amendments to the privacy legislation here that would, in essence, include information - that combined with other information, can identify a person (paraphrased) But one of the privacy issues is how personal information - that which is being protected - is defined.

HOlly On 17/09/2012, at 2:42 AM, John R. Levine wrote:

...

...

As he explains, with NATing, the carriers gain information about what IP addresses are going where - information they can flog to advertisers.

This argument makes no sense. A snoopy ISP could as easily collect this information from non-NAT routers as from NAT boxes.

In Australia, I would have thought that privacy laws would make selling that kind of information illegal. In the US they use noxious services like phorm to collect and sell info, no NAT needed.

R's, John_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org <javascript:;> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org <javascript:;> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji

Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org <javascript:;> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- Cheers,

McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

On 18/09/2012, at 4:55 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:

Thanks Holly, I thought I should share this for general discussion stemming from what you had raised earlier as I have formulated a few questions to enable us to critically think about some of the things and generate discussion. I will listen to the two sided economy,

[If the estimation that there will be somewhere around 3 billion users by 2016 and that judging from current internet traffic, volume will continue to increase in days to come, we wonder why the transitioning phase across the world is still slow.]

I have a few questions for discussion

*NATs* Network Address Translators (NATs) were meant to be short term "temporary solutions" whilst working out "complex far reaching solutions" [see: Egevang, K., and P. Francis, "The IP Network Address Translator (NAT)," RFC 1631<ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc1631.txt>, May 1994. and Huston, G, "Anatomy: A Look Inside Network Address Translators". Huston talks about the advantages and disadvantages of NATs as he discusses its anatomy at length.

*Questions*

1. Why are carriers generally resistant to transitioning to IPv6 and prefer to deal with address shortages through NATs? This is the issue I was addressing 2. Is there a possibility that Carriers who in the advent of the Internet have been losing revenue (preference for VOIP over traditional telephony, mobile substitution etc) and have found that a growing revenue pool in content? [What are the possible drivers behind the ETNO Proposal?] I think it's pretty clear that. The point Geoff makes (particularly in the APrIGF session) is that it is the content providers making money 3. Is there are possibility that with IPv4 addresses, carriers know exactly what IPv4 addresses are doing, behaving and can "sell" (without our express permission) this information to Advertisers? [Imagine the Privacy issues - Australia, UK and France have called on Google to completely destroy their data or investigate its contents, see: http://www.itnews.com.au/News/311216,privacy-commissioner-orders-google-to-d...]; In the US, Google was recently fined US $22.5million for Apple Safari Tracking, this was a Privacy Settlement and the largest US FTC Penalty ever for violation of a Commission Order, see: http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/09/google-ftc-safari-tracking-22-5-million-fine/ Carriers know EXACTLY what they are doing 4. Are Network Operators and Content Providers fearful of the WCIT because they could potentially lose traditional revenues? The danger of WCIT is more about moving from a multi stakeholder, open set of processes to the ITU-T, and from a definition of telecommunications that is greatly expanded. But all of that is on the various posts, including our own site with all relevant documents

Holly

*Some Interesting Readings [shared earlier but consolidated for ease of reference]*

- Network Service Models and the Internet, his views published on his website this month, see: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-09/telecommsandip.html - On the Content economy, his views published on his website in 2001, see: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2001-06/2001-06-content.html - On Carriage v Content, his views published on his website in July, 2012, see: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-07/carriagevcontent.html. He talks briefly about ITRs and ETNO proposal in relation to the ITRs - Anatomy: A Look Inside Network Address Translators, see: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_7-3/anatomy.h... _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 9:14 AM, McTim <dogwallah@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi,

On Saturday, September 15, 2012, Holly Raiche wrote:

...

Hi Carlton

There is a twist to the IPv4/v6 discussion - and it's about money (surprise!) Geoff Huston (our own internet pioneer/guru) asks why the carriers aren't migrating to v6 - and instead dealing with the address shortage (at least in the APNIC region) through NATing. As he explains, with NATing, the carriers gain information about what IP addresses are going where - information they can flog to advertisers.

Do you have a link for this?

Hi McTim as promised, I asked Geoff and this is the link he gave me: http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2012-09/telecommsandip.html There's a disclaimer below to say that this is strictly his opinion and not the opinion of APNIC etc. Sala

Rgds,

McTim

...

It's part of the money shift from the carriers in an analogue, circuit switched world where the carriers got the money, to an IP world where they are missing out and the revenue is going to the content providers. (the WCIT issue about accounting rates no longer providing the carriers with the money they used to collect is relevant here). So the carriers are making do with NATing instead of migrating to the v6 world where, once again, one IP address connects directly to another address and no NATting (and no collecting information about users) in between between (except in ! the usual circumstances of corporates, etc)

Holly

On 16/09/2012, at 6:11 AM, Carlton Samuels wrote:

...

Hi Sala: You misinterpret my skepticism as denial. Wrong.

I'm there with you on all the facts you quote. Yes too, on all the trends you finger. My skepticism is born of the big 'the sky is falling' hoopla. And an analysis that is predicated on immediate and/or imminent scarcity. [Scarcity as in demand driven!]

For the last several years, I've studiously followed the ARIN policy discussions. Its only after you see the details and couple that to a few other facts that it jumps out at ya; the details just don't support the great alarm hurry-up-and-do-this. Look critically at some of the data in context of where access and demand are growing; Africa and Asia. Then have another think.

No, we will not have a collapse anytime soon. No, I doubt if IPv4 addresses will ever be totally exhausted. At least not if some of the policy positions I see being promoted in the ARIN region are implemented!

Yes, if and when that time comes, if someone belly up to your favourite RIR and asks for a **bank* *of addresses, here's the likely response, "well, we ain't got that kind. But here's another kind works just as well if not better! Machine you have might even be prepped for it, see. But you might have to do a few little things to let her fly". That conversation will not take place with a mom and pop operation, trust me. End user networks are not provisioned as the popular myth says.

Troll the lists and you will see this is one topic I've studiously stayed away from. Not because I don't understand the issues; I ran service provisioning businesses absolutely dependent on ready availability of IP addresses. It is because I remain underwhelmed by the hype.

The facts tend to the inconvenient. To the hype, that is. So we are agreed to disagree, albeit agreeably. Nope, the hype on this is over the top. And for the life of me I can't figure out why. In the Y2K storm I knew what it was; there were folks hellbent on picking some pockets.

Maybe its because I am at a point where I've learned to distrust all revealed wisdom and orthodoxy. So I might be the heretic here. Oh well, if salvation comes......

- Carlton

============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@gmail.com> wrote:

...

Snip the whole thing always brings me back to that Y2K jingle.

I would disagree and here's why.

*Demographics* As I write this email, the world's population according to the Population Reference Bureau is 7,087,683,026 as at 6:18am Sunday morning on 16th September, 2012. The World Mortality Report of 2011 rates (produced by the Department of Economic Social Affairs by its Population division) shows that over time the mortality rates have generally gone down although there are still wide disparities in levels of mortality across regions. See:

http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/worldmortalityreport2011/World...

...

...

...

*End Users* Whilst there are 7 billion people on the planet, the World Internet Statistics (IWS) suggest that there are 2,267,233,742 internet users

as at

...

December, 31, 2011. See: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm.

These users distributed would be something like this:- AFRALO region - 6.2% APRALO region - 49% EURALO region - 22.1% LACRALO region - 10.4% NARALO region - 12%

*Can current supply meet demand?* As the push for Universal Service continues to grow as we have seen from recent trend

-- Cheers,

McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851

These are taken from the FAQs link on RIPE NCC's website that I had shared earlier. QWhat does RIPE NCC do with the address space that is returned? A.When the RIPE NCC starts allocating address space from the last /8, all IPv4 address space that is returned to the RIPE NCC will go back into the last /8 pool of IPv4 address space. It will then be re-used to allocate /22s to LIRs according to section 5.6 of “IPv4 Address Allocation and Assignment Policies for the RIPE NCC Service Region”<http://ripe.net/ripe/docs/ipv4-policies> The rule 5.6 ( http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-553 )says: 5.6 Use of last /8 for PA Allocations The following policies come into effect as soon as RIPE NCC is required to make allocations from the final /8 it receives from the IANA. From then on the distribution of IPv4 address space will only be done as follows: 1. Allocations for LIRs from the last /8 On application for IPv4 resources LIRs will receive IPv4 addresses according to the following: 1. LIRs may only receive one allocation from this /8. The size of the allocation made under this policy will be exactly one /22. 2. LIRs receive only one /22, even if their needs justify a larger allocation. 3. LIRs may apply for and receive this allocation once they meet the criteria to receive IPv4 address space according to the allocation policy in effect in the RIPE NCC service region at the time of application. 4. Allocations will only be made to LIRs if they have already received an IPv6 allocation from an upstream LIR or the RIPE NCC. 2. Assignments to Internet Exchange Point A /16 from the final /8 will be held in reserve for exclusive use by Internet Exchange Points. On application for IPv4 resources, an Internet Exchange Point (IXP) will receive one number resource (/24 to /22) according to the following: - This space will be used to run an Internet Exchange Point peering LAN; other uses are forbidden. - Organisations receiving space under this policy must be Internet Exchange Points and must meet the definition as described in section two of the RIPE document “IPv6 Address Space for Internet Exchange Points”. - IXPs holding other PI IPv4 space for their peering LAN (i.e. they are seeking a larger assignment), must return their old peering LAN resources back to this pool within 180 days of assignment. - New Internet Exchange points will be assigned a /24. Internet exchange points may return this /24 (or existing PI used as an IXP peering LAN) should they run out of space and receive a larger (/23, or /22 if utilisation requires) assignment. - IP space returned by Internet Exchange Points will be added to the reserved pool maintained for Internet Exchange Point use. - Assignments will only be made to IXPs who have already applied for, or received an IPv6 assignment for their peering LAN 3. Unforeseen circumstance 1. A /16 will be held in reserve for some future uses, as yet unforeseen. The Internet is a disruptive technology and we cannot predict what might happen. Therefore it is prudent to keep a /16 in reserve, just in case some future requirement makes a demand of it. In the event that this /16 remains unused at the time the remaining /8 covered by this policy has been distributed, it returns to the pool to be distributed as per clause 1. 4. Post-depletion Address Recycling This section only applies to address space that is returned to the RIPE NCC and that will not be returned to the IANA but re-issued by the RIPE NCC itself. 1. Any address space that is returned to the RIPE NCC will be covered by the same rules as the address space intended in clause 1. 2. Minimum allocation sizes for the relevant /8 blocks will be updated if necessary 5. Insufficient address space In case an allocation of a single /22 as per clause 1 can no longer be made, multiple allocations up to an equivalent of a /22 in address space will be made to fulfill a request. Kind Regards, Sala On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 5:31 AM, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> wrote:

Hi,

Not to mention all of the legacy addresses (almost half of all IPv4 addresses) that are not yet really redistributable because the rules restrict the ways in which they may be redistributed.

avri

On 14 Sep 2012, at 23:58, McTim wrote:

...

Except this does not mean "empty" it means ~16 Million left (one /8).

-- Cheers,

McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com> wrote:

...

RIPE says the cupboard is empty on them now....

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/09/europe-officially-runs...)

...

- Carlton

============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

-- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851

Approximately half of all IPv4 addresses (legacy allocations) are sort of not in the system at all. Some people argue for a marketplace that allows for trading of addresses for other considerations. As far as I can tell none of the RIRs has really bought into this notion in any way yet. Neither, if I recall correctly, did the IAB.

ARIN has sort of a wink and nod policy, which allows "directed" transfers from one entity to another, so long as the receiving entity would have qualified under the usual allocation rules. I don't think they've ever rejected one, so we don't know what would happen if they did. Presumably the two entities would have said that's nice, we're going to do it anyway and it's not our problem if you refuse to update your records. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly