rod at rb.net.au
Mon Mar 4 18:18:41 EST 2013
Mark Andrews questions, my answers:
Q1: I'm curious, how would you have allocated address over the last 10
A: Not sure I could have done better with allocations. What could have been
done better is a 'use it or lose it' clause in the conditions applying to
not only new allocations but all historical allocations.
Q2: Please list actual resources that APNIC, ARIN or RIPE could recover.
A: Specious question used to mask a case for doing nothing. Please ask
better questions that contribute in a meaningful way this good discussion.
Q3: Is there really? Not globally announced does not mean that they are
A: Partially agreed. The fact some people have legitimate uses is no excuse
to do nothing.
Q4: Again what used addresses?
A: See answer to Q2.
From: Mark Andrews [mailto:marka at isc.org]
Sent: Monday, 4 March 2013 5:01 PM
To: Rod Veith
Cc: 'AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net'
Subject: Re: [AusNOG] IPv4
In message < <mailto:email@example.com>
firstname.lastname@example.org>, "Rod Veith" writes:
> "Was v4 allocations screwed? I don't know. We didn't know what was
> going to happen 20 years ago... It is easy to look back in hindsight."
> V4 allocations ARE screwed using hindsight. There is one camp saying
> get over it, use V6 and forget the screwed V4 allocations. And the
> other camp says why not try to fix the problem.
I'm curious, how would you have allocated address over the last 10 years?
As far as I can tell the RIR's all have allocated address on the basis of
need. They didn't hide the fact that IPv4 address were in limited supply.
They did all they could to promote IPv6 which unlike IPv4 has enough
addresses for everyone on the planet.
> It is typical human behaviour to sit on resources even if they are not
> being used because 'one just never knows if they might be needed in 10
> years' time or worth something. Just because many people and
> businesses do this doesn't make it right, just as sitting back and
> letting past mistakes continue is not right.
> I think it is wrong of APNIC to NOT take a more proactive role in
> V4 allocations that were obvious mistakes in the past, just as other
> "resource allocators" around the world should be doing the same thing.
> Just because people with allocations are going to scream "you can't
> take away something I might use one day etc etc" doesn't mean the
> attempt shouldn't be made.
Please list actual resources that APNIC, ARIN or RIPE could recover.
> "IPv4 is dead. People need to get over it and move to IPv6..."
> No, IPv4 is not dead. Why should people get over it when quite clearly
> there is a resource not being properly managed. People have every
> right to complain about mismanagement of an important resource. Agreed
> though that people need to move to IPv6 as they can. Problem is that
> many of the organisations with the technical knowledge and resources
> to move to IPv4 have already tied up most of the IPv4 space and don't yet
care, after all,
> that's a problem for the next CIO to fix.
Is there really? Not globally announced does not mean that they are
> APNIC needs to grow some balls on this issue and take the lead on
> preserving a scarce resource and re-allocate unused space. If they are
> not willing to behave properly, maybe the resource deserves to be
> given to the ITU to manage.
Again what usused addresses?
Mark Andrews, ISC
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: <mailto:marka at isc.org>
marka at isc.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the AusNOG