[lacnog] Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock Re: 202203132321.AYC

[Abraham Y. Chen]

Hi, Jorge:

1)    " ... Recovering this /4 block might allow a 2-4 years of ?peace? 
but after that we'll be in the same situation of IPv4 ... ":    Perhaps 
you did not recognize that EzIP is proposing to utilize the 240/4 as the 
fourth private network address pool, not as basic unicast addresses as 
you might have in mind? As such, Each RAN (Regional Area Network) will 
be tethering off the current Internet via one public IPv4 address like 
an umbilical cord. Consequently, not only there will be no 240/4 
netblock address exhaustion issue, the basic public IPv4 pool will have 
surplus as well. Hope this resolve your concern.

Regards,


Abe (2022-03-13 23:32 EDT)


> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Re: Resumen de LACNOG, Vol 171, Envío 11
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2022 11:41:53 -0500
> From: Jorge Villa<villa en reduniv.edu.cu>
> To: Latin America and Caribbean Region Network Operators Group
> 	<lacnog en lacnic.net>
> Subject: Re: [lacnog] Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock Re:
> 	202203112350.AYC
> Message-ID:<94F0E428-7398-4AB1-B1F6-D7ADE15C245C en reduniv.edu.cu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi, just adding a few words to the Tomas Lynch comment.
>
>   
>
> Please, don?t forget that the Internet infrastructure is not only the part created by a few big operators and Tier I or II ISPs. The Internet is really bigger than that. If you make a real-time inventory now, you'll find that there are a lot of working devices on the Internet that have reached their end of support from their respective manufacturers. Of course, those devices won?t be upgraded to scale to the new ExIP but they'll keep up and running. It will be an unwanted situation for the operation and the stability of the Internet infrastructure.
>
> Doing this kind of ?fix?, you?ll have to make almost the same effort  (inventory, software patching, hardware upgrade and replace, routing, security, and so on ) that deploying IPv6. Recovering this /4 block might allow a 2-4 years of ?peace? but after that we'll be in the same situation of IPv4 exhausting that we have nowadays. Definitely, to adopt ExIP, we?ll have to invest a lot of efforts and money in a temporary solution instead of a definitive solution for the same price (or less, because even when a lot of operators haven?t deployed IPv6 now, they have been acquiring IPv6 capable hardware and software as part of their usual business process). Deploying IPv6 is the definitive answer.
>
>   
>
> Regards,
>
> Jorge
>
> De: LACNOG<lacnog-bounces en lacnic.net>  en nombre de Tomas Lynch<tomas.lynch en gmail.com>
> Responder a: Latin America and Caribbean Region Network Operators Group<lacnog en lacnic.net>
> Fecha: sábado, 12 de marzo de 2022, 10:34 a. m.
> Para: Latin America and Caribbean Region Network Operators Group<lacnog en lacnic.net>
> Asunto: Re: [lacnog] Making Use of 240/4 NetBlock Re: 202203112350.AYC
>
>   
>
> This part of the proposal doesn't have in mind the operations of a network:
>
>   
>
>>   A.    Disable the program codes in current routers that have been disabling the use of the 240/4 NetBlock. The cost of this software engineering should be minimal.
>   
>
> Yes, let's say that the cost for Vendor A could be minimal: they will remove some lines in the code for version X.Y and release version X.Y-EzIP without bugs triggered by removing those lines. Then, we, the operators, would have to plan the upgrade of all of our routers, spend days programming the upgrade, spend nights in maintenance windows, maybe pay for remote hands, etc., just to extend for a few more days the inevitable agony of IPv4.
>
>   
>
> Thus, the cost of the so-called EzIP is not minimal.
>
>   
>
>   


-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un adjunto en formato HTML...
URL: <https://mail.lacnic.net/pipermail/lacnog/attachments/20220313/8c45998c/attachment-0001.htm>