* John Curran:
> I agree with Chris; this (and any other returns) won't change the IPv4
> depletion/IPv6 deployment timeline substantially,
I guess there are a lots of unused assignments within
provider-dependent address space. In my experience with a couple of
LIRs, none of them was very eager
--Original Message-
From: John Curran [mailto:jcur...@arin.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 10:38 AM
To: Jeroen Massar
Cc: nanog@nanog.org Operators Group
Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of 45/8
address block
On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:24 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote
John Curran wrote:
> 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.
For what it'
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 03:23:48PM -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> I remember writing (complaining) about it in a thread back in April,
> appreciated.
I still don't know why anyone would complain, although I do
thank Interop for their generosity.
Here's some truth:
1) At
- Original Message -
> From: "Randy Carpenter"
> To: "Joel Esler"
> Cc: "North American Network Operators Group"
> Sent: Thursday, 21 October, 2010 10:00:25 AM
> Subject: Re: ARIN recognizes Interop for return of more than 99% of 4
John Curran wrote:
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?
INTEROP is retaining 2 /16 blocks for existing usage;
- Original Message -
> On Oct 20, 2010, at 4:58 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> > On Oct 20, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Joel Esler wrote:
> >> There are lots of places that /8, and multiple ones at that that
> >> aren't using them.
> >
> > Which /8s are those?
>
>
> As someone else mentioned the Gov't
On Oct 20, 2010, at 4:58 PM, David Conrad wrote:
> On Oct 20, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Joel Esler wrote:
>> There are lots of places that /8, and multiple ones at that that aren't
>> using them.
>
> Which /8s are those?
As someone else mentioned the Gov't has /8's they aren't using the whole of.
--
J
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Brandon Ross wrote:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Jeroen Massar wrote:
[John, is 45.127.0.0/16 one of the two blocks they keep, or is it
hijacked already? :) ]
I can authoritatively say, yes it is.
I spoke too soon. It is not hijacked, it's simply old cruft from an old
show t
Joel,
On Oct 20, 2010, at 1:55 PM, Joel Esler wrote:
> There are lots of places that /8, and multiple ones at that that aren't using
> them.
Which /8s are those?
Thanks,
-drc
On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:45 AM, Joe Maimon wrote:
> Christopher Morrow wrote:
>> On Wed, 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
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Jeroen Massar wrote:
[John, is 45.127.0.0/16 one of the two blocks they keep, or is it
hijacked already? :) ]
I can authoritatively say, yes it is. We (Interop) are not announcing any
part of 45/8 at the moment, and don't plan to do so until the return is
complete. I'l
On 20/10/10 17:47, Brielle Bruns wrote:
> Not to stir an already boiling over pot and all, but is there any kind of
> report or documentation on releasing of space from countries other then the
> North American region?
Really it's mainly US govt agencies, defence contractors, etc from the dawn of
On 10/20/10 11:34 AM, John Curran wrote:
On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:47 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote:
Not to stir an already boiling over pot and all, but is there any
kind of report or documentation on releasing of space from
countries other then the North American region?
You're not going to find a lo
On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:47 PM, Brielle Bruns wrote:
>
> Not to stir an already boiling over pot and all, but is there any kind of
> report or documentation on releasing of space from countries other then the
> North American region?
You're not going to find a lot of large allocations which are u
On 10/20/2010 7:13 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
i think this is cool, but ...
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.
i know the us has the world series,
On Wed, 2010-10-20 at 17:40 +0100, John Curran wrote:
> > Also makes me wonder if there are historical versions of this registry
> > available. If reclamation of large blocks such as this becomes
> > commonplace, will many of the legacy allocations simply become
> > footnotes? (In the registry docu
On 10/20/10 7:34 AM, John Curran wrote:
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 Int
On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:29 PM, Stephen D. Strowes wrote:
> Interested to know how this will show in the IANA v4 address space
> registry. Will 045/8 soon appear as belonging to ARIN, since it is now
> not Interop's?
Correct. Also note that the concept of a single RIR managing each
/8 only applies
Interested to know how this will show in the IANA v4 address space
registry. Will 045/8 soon appear as belonging to ARIN, since it is now
not Interop's?
Also makes me wonder if there are historical versions of this registry
available. If reclamation of large blocks such as this becomes
commonplace
On 10/20/2010 11:20 AM, John Curran wrote:
ARIN recognizes that such parties could use the specified
transfer policy to receive compensation despite being able
to return the space, but overall the community recommended
proceeding because the benefit to overall utilization was
deemed worthwhile.
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?
It would be best for folks who can return address space
to do so as soon as possible,
On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:04 PM, Ernie Rubi wrote:
> I don't think ARIN (or any other RIR) wants people to think this way.
Ernie - ARIN doesn't have a view on how people should think. It
does have an interest in making sure that number resources policies
that are adopted by community are followe
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: "thi
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
Christopher Morrow wrote:
On Wed, 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?
less than 3 months supply at the going drai
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
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
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:28 AM, John Curran 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
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 retu
On Oct 20, 2010, at 11:26 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Wed, 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?
>
>
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:11 AM, 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.
it's nice that interop did a nice thing here, but seriously, this is
~3 months of usage... there is
On Wed, 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?
less than 3 months supply at the going drain rate.
[John, is 45.127.0.0/16 one of the two blocks they keep, or is it
hijacked already? :) ]
On 2010-10-20 17:11, 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.
The problem with that
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?
INTEROP is retaining 2 /16 blocks for existing usage;
i.e. more than
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.
Joel
On Oct 20, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> Thank you Interop - for performing an outstanding act
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:
>>> 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.
>>
>> i know the us has the world series, but global > arin region
>
> The problem is that we haven
On Oct 20, 2010, at 10:13 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
> i think this is cool, but ...
>
>> 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.
>
> i know the us h
i think this is cool, but ...
> 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.
i know the us has the world series, but global > arin region
randy
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
41 matches
Mail list logo
