bobp at purdon.id.au
Mon Mar 4 10:30:35 EST 2013
On 4/03/13 1:21 AM, Van Der Meulen, M
> So on one hand I see, large corporate A with more address space than
> required, abusing the system because they can’t be bothered(amongst
> other reasons) and it doesn’t make commercially sense to.
I reckon one area the relevant NIC's should explore is the reclaiming of
unused legacy space. Some will argue that this was "given" to these
organisations many years ago, but things can and do change.
I'm thinking of the universities that are sitting on /16's, yet
announcing only a /24 or two from that range. I believe the US
military, and various large corporations are also guilty of sitting on /8's.
The NIC's should be looking at what is announced and for space that's
not the owners should be required to announce it (with useful/meaningful
services occupying it), or hand it back.
If it's not in the global routing table then you don't need it (you
should renumber into RFC1918 space and NAT, since if you are using the
space you're obviously NATing it).
If you are announcing it, but nothing is listening (even residential DSL
users are often pingable and a small percentage have something
listening) - then you're probably using it for outward initiated
connectivity, in which case you can most likely use NAT and don't need
the space either.
An exception would be space recently allocated for which a viable usage
plan was presented when the space was allocated, and the plan is being
I'm sure none of that is perfect, but perhaps it could form the basis
for some form of space reclamation policy?
Sure, it's just delaying the inevitable, so in conjunction with doing
that there should be some IPv6 deployment incentive (perhaps allocation
of the reclaimed IPv4 space is conditional on the applicant having
Just throwing it out there...
More information about the AusNOG