Behold - the Address-Yenta!

Thu Apr 8 19:39:32 UTC 2010

On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 03:14:50PM -0400, William Herrin wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:37 PM,  <bmanning at vacation.karoshi.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 02:22:29PM -0400, William Herrin wrote:
> >> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Mr. James W. Laferriere
> >> >        Try that fee while trying to make a living in a depressed econimic
> >> > region JUST for an ipv4 /24 Assignment .  I don't make enough to cover that
> >>
> >> Not much sympathy for folks crying the blues about the cost of an
> >> address assignment that they're going to turn around and announce into
> >> the DFZ...
> >
> >        assuming facts not in evidence there ... but ok.
> 
> Hi Bill,
> 
> If you're not planning to announce a route into the DFZ, we have
> RFC1918 or IPv6's ULA, address pools that are 100% and completely free
> for your use.

	er... you misunderstand... there is no single "DFZ" anywhere...
	it is a fiction.  no prefix in existance, save 127.0.0.0, ::1,
	and 0.0.0.0 is globally reachable.   reachability depends on your
	POV, where "you" is roughly the number of addressable entities
	on the planet.  folks announce a route to their peers, and last
	i checked, no ASN peered with -everyone-.

	that said, transient connectivity is even more popular now
	than it was twenty years ago.  folks connect/disconnect/reconnet
	all the time.

	this is the primary reason why Globally Unique Addresses are so
	important - one cna nver tell when they will need to peer with
	someone else in the future.

> 
> >> ARIN has implemented a structure to facilitate IPv4 address transfers
> >> should an open market come to exist. Between an address market and the
> >> ever more creative use of NAT, it should be possible for IPv4
> >> addressing to continue after free pool depletion as a zero-sum game.
> >> Exactly how long is a matter of debate with speculation ranging from
> >> months to decades.
> >
> >        cool.  I've used the transfer policy with limited success.
> >        I guess the interesting thing in your statement (and I suspect
> >        a trip to the ARIN NRPM is in order) is "should an open market
> >        come into existence" ... how do you see that happening?
> 
> eBay?

	last ebay transaction I saw was a posting by Martin Levy - and it was
	withdrawn after some urging by ARIN.  Addresses are not sellable
	property.  So what would an "open market" be in... rights to use?
	(come to think of it, I have seen submarine cable IRUs for sale on eBAY)

> Given a demand and a supply, markets don't traditionally need a whole
> lot of help to come into being.

	Ok... lets say there is a pent up supply ...  and no good way to
	let those with demand know the supply exists.   I'll consider
	acting as the "address Yenta"   ---   if folks have prefixes they
	are not using, and would like to let others know there is availablity,
	I'll be glad to be the "go between".


> >        but more to my point.  If I'm using a single /24 out of my /20
> >        (using an antiquated example) - would there be:
> >
> >        ) interest in the other 15 /24s
> >        ) how would that interest be expressed (so I would know about it)
> >        ) complaints from the folks running w/o default about
> >          the new prefixes on offer?  **
> 
> The basic plan (ARIN NRPM section 8.3) is:
> 
> 1. Request and be approved for addresses from ARIN (even though ARIN
> won't have any addresses to give).
> 
> 2. Find (pay) someone who has ARIN-managed addresses that they're
> willing to give up in the quantity you want.
> 
> 3. Current holder releases addresses to ARIN in the requested (paid)
> quantity with instructions to provide those addresses to the
> already-authorized recipient (in #1).
> 
> 4. ARIN updates the registration accordingly.

	
	I remember this.  it suffers from two primary weaknesses:

	) finding someone (see my address-Yenta offer above)
	) this only works within the ARIN region.


> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Dorn Hetzel <dhetzel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > If there was an automatic website that just handed out up to a /40 on
> > demand, and charged a one-time fee of $100, I don't think the space would
> > ever be exhausted, there isn't enough money.
> 
> 137 billion prefixes would crush the DFZ routers of course, but as we
> all know the routing table isn't ARIN's lookout. :-P
> 
> 
> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
> >> ARIN's unilateral right under the LRSA to reclaim my addresses in the
> >> event of a dispute bugs me a tad, as does similar verbiage sprinkled
> >> throughout.
> >
> > Let's clarify here, however...
> > Nothing guarantees you that ARIN can not do so if you don't have any
> > contract with them.
> 
> Owen,
> 
> Your uneducated YANAL opinion about the governing law in the matter is
> duly noted and filed beside my own differing viewpoint. Until and
> unless ARIN attempts to forcibly reclaim a block of legacy addresses
> from its legacy holder, the question remains theoretical.
> 
> 
> > The point being that
> > while I think continuing to provide a free ride to IPv4 legacy holders
> > is a good idea, there is no reason to continue that concept into the
> > IPv6 world.
> 
> The reason is that it could be structured to increase the rate of IPv6
> deployment, to the benefit of all. To what degree that would achieve
> value for cost is debatable, but it certainly qualifies as more than
> "no reason."
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
> 
> -- 
> William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
> 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
>