[AusNOG] APNIC Slashes Costs for New Members
Brad Evans
brad at delion.com.au
Fri Mar 1 22:04:45 EST 2013
You said it yourself, you're IPv6 ready, but no one else is.
On 1/03/2013 9:55 PM, Jared Hirst wrote:
> Agreed, but why speed the process up!
>
> Regards,
>
> Jared Hirst
> Servers Australia Pty Ltd
> Phone: 1300 788 862
> Direct: (02) 4307 4205
> E-mail: jared.hirst at serversaustralia.com.au
> <mailto:jared.hirst at serversaustralia.com.au>
>
> On 01/03/2013, at 9:46 PM, Damian Guppy <the.damo at gmail.com
> <mailto:the.damo at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> No offence, but at this point following the policies you talk about
>> would still be akin to bailing out the titanic with a hand pump, the
>> move to IPv6 is needed, and the sooner the better. The whole "we are
>> running out of IP's" thing has been going on for over 20 years now,
>> it needs to end some where.
>>
>> --Damian
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 6:36 PM, Jared Hirst
>> <jared.hirst at serversaustralia.com.au
>> <mailto:jared.hirst at serversaustralia.com.au>> wrote:
>>
>> Ok no worries. I don't agree with you at all and we will leave it
>> at that.
>>
>> If anyone else wants to speak up then do. If not ill shut up and
>> never
>> question APNIC policies again.
>>
>> Your attitude of 'restricting and policing IP's' won't change a thing
>> is the exact reason we are in this position.
>>
>> If people were conservative with space, use carrier grade NAT and
>> actually assigned IP's as per policy them you and I would not be
>> having this conversation, end of story. There would be ample space
>> available IF people followed policies.
>>
>> Call it what you like but people not following policy as got us in
>> this position.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jared Hirst
>> Servers Australia Pty Ltd
>> Phone: 1300 788 862 <tel:1300%20788%20862>
>> Direct: (02) 4307 4205 <tel:%2802%29%204307%204205>
>> E-mail: jared.hirst at serversaustralia.com.au
>> <mailto:jared.hirst at serversaustralia.com.au>
>>
>> On 01/03/2013, at 9:12 PM, Mark Newton <newton at atdot.dotat.org
>> <mailto:newton at atdot.dotat.org>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > On 01/03/2013, at 8:16 PM, Jared Hirst
>> <jared.hirst at serversaustralia.com.au
>> <mailto:jared.hirst at serversaustralia.com.au>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> They have a policy for recovering un used address from what I
>> was told
>> >> by them, they just don't have the resources to action it.
>> >
>> > There's also almost exactly zero point in actioning it. The
>> cost/benefit
>> > equation has a pretty small denominator and a very large numerator.
>> >
>> >> Don't have a stab at me, I'm speaking what most are probably
>> thinking.
>> >
>> > That's the thing -- I don't think you are. Otherwise the
>> policy would
>> > be different.
>> >
>> >> Yes I should go to the policy meetings and I will, and I will
>> speak on
>> >> behalf of around 30 providers that have directly emailed me saying
>> >> they agree... However from what I was told there IS a policy
>> to stop
>> >> this, but no one actions it.
>> >
>> > Well, all their policies are on their website. If you want to
>> turn yourself
>> > into the policy police, start naming and shaming and see how
>> far it goes.
>> >
>> > <popcorn>
>> >
>> >> If you don't think people use loop holes to get IP's for no reason
>> >> then you need to come and work for a hosting company for a day
>> and see
>> >> the shit people say to get an IP, second opinions are approved
>> for no
>> >> reason and IP's are handed out like they are not limited. No
>> wonder we
>> >> have a world wide shortage.
>> >
>> > It isn't supposed to be hard.
>> >
>> > We have a world-wide shortage because we have an address space good
>> > for 4 billion addresses plus change, and we have more than 4
>> billion
>> > devices wanting to use it.
>> >
>> > Put up all the administrative barriers you like, and there
>> still won't
>> > be enough IPv4.
>> >
>> > Having said that, under the "last /8" policy the remaining store of
>> > IPv4 addresses in the APNIC region is, for all intents and
>> purposes,
>> > unlimited -- in the sense that there are 16384 allocatable
>> /22's, and
>> > less than 16384 APNIC members, and a rule that says only one
>> /22 can
>> > be allocated to each member. As long as APNIC continues to
>> have less
>> > than 16384 members between now and when IPv6 is mainstream
>> (which seems
>> > likely, even for pessimistic estimates of that time horizon),
>> the remaining
>> > addresses are, for all intents and purposes, unlimited.
>> >
>> > So, with that policy in place, we have no further need to put
>> barriers
>> > in the way of allocations.
>> >
>> >
>> >> The fact people can now get a /22 with minimal justification
>> and cost
>> >> is my argument,
>> >
>> > They've -always- been able to get a /22 with minimal justification.
>> >
>> > The only thing that's changed is the price.
>> >
>> > Now: When Gerry Harvey complains about reduced prices enabling new
>> > market entrants, we all laugh and call it "rent seeking," and
>> say it's
>> > a sign that his industry has given up on innovation.
>> >
>> >> it's now making it easy to source and hold on to for
>> >> selling and making a profit for later.
>> >
>> > Great! More of that, please. Perhaps they'll inflate the IPv4
>> price
>> > bubble so much that migrating to IPv6 has less cost attached to
>> it than
>> > acquiring IPv4, then we'll start to see some real progress.
>> >
>> >> I agree there are some people
>> >> that really do need them and I FULLY support them IF they have
>> a REAL
>> >> justification.
>> >
>> > Your problem is that you're using your subjective judgment of their
>> > justification to decide if it's "real", instead of applying the
>> criteria
>> > that's in the actual APNIC policy.
>> >
>> > APNIC doesn't do that. They follow what their members have
>> directed them
>> > to follow. There is consequently a mismatch between their
>> behaviour and
>> > your expectations.
>> >
>> > It's important to recognize that your expectations are the problem
>> > here. Most past that and we're done!
>> >
>> >> (In fact i have helped many customers of mine move off
>> >> my space to their own allocation) A justification of 'we have
>> ssl's'
>> >> is not longer valid in my opinion, you can use SNI or something
>> >> similar to overcome the need for a IP for a SSL, however
>> people still
>> >> seem to use this excuse to gain IP space, I see it everyday in
>> >> hosting.
>> >
>> > It's not supposed to be hard. They're not "making excuses" to gain
>> > space; it's actually -your- policies they're trying to find
>> loopholes
>> > in to carry out the business you're supposed to be enabling,
>> not APNIC's
>> > policies.
>> >
>> >> Obviously in your world of ISP land it's a lot different. But
>> MANY in
>> >> hosting are seeing this horrible trend.
>> >
>> > Why is it "horrible"?
>> >
>> >> I'm now going to enjoy my beer and Friday night and will look
>> forward
>> >> to attending the next APNIC policy meeting
>> >
>> > Excellent! Here it is: http://conference.apnic.net/36
>> >
>> >> armed with example
>> >> companies hoarding IP's that have knowingly ripped off the
>> application
>> >> policy.
>> >
>> > Where "ripped off" seems to be the same as "complied with."
>> >
>> > Unless you're accusing APNIC of incompetently executing the
>> policies,
>> > and thereby granting address space to people who shouldn't have it.
>> >
>> > Is that what you're doing?
>> >
>> >> Remember I support the genuine people that need IP's
>> >
>> > Yep, by *YOUR* interpretation of their "need."
>> >
>> > Other people see needs differently, and they vote at APNIC
>> meetings too.
>> >
>> > - mark
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net <mailto:AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net>
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AusNOG mailing list
> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20130301/1c703568/attachment.html>
More information about the AusNOG
mailing list