[AusNOG] IPv4

Jared Hirst jared.hirst at serversaustralia.com.au
Sun Mar 3 18:08:50 EST 2013


They were customers, once I found out what they were doing. They were no
longer customers, because I have a very strong view of not abusing the
system, clearly you do not from your below post.

I guess we will leave it at that, I like to do the right thing and you
think monetizing and eating available space is the best way, and also doing
nothing about existing un-used allocations.

Thanks for your Input, I hope APNIC never approve space for you knowing
what you will do with it.

*From:* Tim March [mailto:march.tim at gmail.com]
*Sent:* Sunday, March 03, 2013 6:03 PM
*To:* Jared Hirst
*Cc:* ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
*Subject:* Re: [AusNOG] IPv4

On 3/03/13 5:21 PM, Jared Hirst wrote:

1.       Agreed, but that’s not me.

Accepted, just pointing it out. My point here is that raging about new
business' picking up a couple of /22's seems irrelevant. The bulk of the
address space is already allocated to existing companies. Game over.

2.       Sorry my website is not compliant, every customer is / can be if
they want and I think that’s the main thing, the fact our website is not
right at the point is irrelevant. It’s ONE site. And its offline because
the CDN we use cannot support it, I’ll put it back to direct tomorrow to
make everyone happy.

If you're spewing at people about not running IPv6 and the most trivially
publicly assessable indication of your own compliance is AWOL (even if
you're doing a bunch of great stuff with it on the back-end of your
business) you look hypocritical. I'm not arguing one way or the other
whether that is the case but It's all about perception, right?

3.       No it wouldn’t, it means there would be around 8,000 busineses
about to become richer, by selling off their space they got in the final
allocation for no reason.

Firstly, who really cares? Business has and always will exist for the sole
purpose of generating revenue. Sometimes they choose do it via means that
we might consider odious, but that are are entirely legal. Domain squatting
immediately comes to mind here.

Getting butthurt because you're not the one making the money isn't going to
change it. If you honestly reckon everyone is gonna make it rain fat stacks
of IP benjamins the smart move is to buy as many of them as possible right
now. Maybe one day they'll become an exchange traded commodity and you'll
be able to buy dope with them at Silk Road.

Secondly, asserting that the flow on implications of 16k new (predominately
tech, presumably) companies popping up are trivial shows a fundamental
misunderstanding of economics. According to the ABR there were ~ 2.1M
actively trading Australian businesses in 2011, 12% (252,000) of which
relate to professional, scientific and technical services. Let's assume,
VERY generously, that a full third of those (84,000) are technical. You're
talking about growing the IT sector by something like close to 20%
(probably much more, given the generosity of the numbers I'm using)

Like it or not, technology exists for the sole purpose of making money...
Who do you want to be here? The butthurt techo, or the dude who's EBITDA
just doubled.

4.       I’m not raging my customers? When did I say that, I think you have
totally mis-read what I have been saying… I’m with Bev on this one,
Mis-allocation and the lack of pulling back un-used allocations has got us
here, and now with low cost entry to APNIC I think more mis-allocation will
be done. We then got onto v6 and I advised that we allocate it by default
to customers, however 99% of their ISP’s are not compliant so the
allocation from us is effectively useless. I would LOVE to also see v6
working / running and implemented in 12 months as it’s so much easier to
allocate / manage and work with, but that’s just not going to happen. As
for people saying I should have planned 15 years ago, I was 10 then… and
didn’t even know what an IP was. I started planning 2 years ago after being
an IP holder for one year, so I think that people should just let that one
go, not many other businesses can say that after having a v4 allocation for
only 3 years that they have started to move to v6 yet. Most are not even
thinking / planning it.

On 1/03/13 5:59 PM, Jared Hirst wrote:

I have a customer that had less than 128 IP’s with us, they applied around
6 months ago to APNIC and got a /22 so that they can ‘just have them’ they
have no plans to use them and I am sure that they are just going to sit on
them to sell. I approached them and they laughed about the whole depletion
policy saying ‘someone will come up with a solution’ almost like they have
NO idea about the seriousness of the final allocation policy.

When I reported this to APNIC they did not really have a way to do anything
about it.

On 1/03/13 7:34 PM, Jared Hirst wrote:

I've mentioned it to apnic and got no response. Ill take that advice

and attend a policy meeting and voice my concerns plus show some

evidence of it happening (I know of 10+ cases)

Personally, I couldn't care less if you went and set their house on fire...
Just pointing out that any business punter reading those comments is
probably going to think the same thing I did.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20130303/5eb775ae/attachment.html>

More information about the AusNOG mailing list