Get as much IP space as you ever dreamed of, was: Re: Looking to buy IPv4 addresses from class C swamp

Mon Apr 28 22:49:03 UTC 2003

Thus spake "Stephen J. Wilcox" <steve at telecomplete.co.uk>
> [Should non-routed addresses be revoked?]
>
> No, but they should be watched to see if they remain unrouted and then
> try to contact the owner..

There's already a project underway to reclaim unrouted allocations.

> > There are companies that connect to thousands of other companies
> > (see the financial markets) that require unique addressing between
> > companies with non-colliding address ranges.  10.x.x.x doesn't quite
> > cut it.
>
> Why not? 16 million addresses arent enough? (and thats only 10/8)
>
> RFC1918 does suggest non-public intra-company networks use
> private space.

N companies can have up to N(N-1) interconnections, which requires either:
a) double NAT, with a single address range for all interconnects
b) no NAT, with a unique address range for each interconnect
c) very careful management of the RFC1918 space such that no two companies
talking have a collision
d) globally unique addresses for each participant using RIRs

(c) simply doesn't work in reality, (b) is no better than (d), and (a) is
beyond ugly not to mention incompatible with many apps.

Furthermore, ARIN emphatically claims they make no guarantees their
allocations are routable, nor do any of their policies or RFC2050 require
allocations be announced.  Finally, ARIN has no policy authorizing
revocation of an allocation other than for nonpayment of fees; even failure
to meet efficiency requirements doesn't justify that.  You're talking major
policy changes.

S

Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking