Will a single /27 get fully routed these days?

Sun Jan 26 08:12:10 UTC 2014

On Jan 25, 2014, at 23:56 , Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl> wrote:

> Hi Owen,
> 
> Op 26 jan. 2014, om 05:36 heeft Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> het volgende geschreven:
> 
>> On Jan 25, 2014, at 13:59 , Sander Steffann <sander at steffann.nl> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>>> […] But, when that happens ARIN will only have the 'Dedicated IPv4 block to facilitate IPv6 Deployment' [1] left, and it will use 'a minimum size allocation of /28 and a maximum size allocation of /24' for that block. The block is meant for things like dual stacked DNS servers, NAT64 and other IPv6 deployments where a bit of IPv4 is still necessary.
>>> 
>>> I wonder how reachable those systems will be... Will people adjust their filters, or will most usage of this block (and thereby all new entrants in the ISP market in the ARIN region) just be doomed?
>> 
>> That's actually may not be the best question. That block will come from within a specific prefix and I suspect that ISPs and the like will adjust their filters FOR THAT PREFIX.
> 
> Same question… Will people adjust their filters, (even if only for that prefix)? All over the world? I think 'will adjust their filters for XYZ' is highly optimistic, but let's hope it will work, otherwise the ISPs in the ARIN region will have a problem. (Or maybe not: existing ISPs (for who a /2[4-8] is not a significant amount) might not mind if a new competitors only gets a /2[5-8] that they cannot route globally. But I really hope it doesn't come to that.)
> 

Realistically, anyone depending on IPv4 is going to has a growing problem which will only continue to grow.

> But more important: which /10 is set aside for this? It is not listed on https://www.arin.net/knowledge/ip_blocks.html

I'm not sure it has been determined yet, let alone announced.

> 
>> Consider the possibility of a policy change which allows the transfer of smaller blocks (current ARIN policy limits this to /24 minimum, but ARIN policy is not immutable, we have a policy development process so that anyone who wants to can start the process of changing it.)
> 
> I’m well aware of that, but I’ll stick to RIPE policies for now :-)

I admit I'm not familiar with the details of the RIPE policy in this regard. Do they allow longer prefixes to be transferred and/or acquired?

I will point out that the NA in NANOG mostly refers to the ARIN region.

Owen