ipv4/25s and above

Fri Nov 18 04:13:23 UTC 2022

On 11/17/22 19:55, Joe Maimon wrote:

>
> You could instead use a /31.

We could, but many of our DIA customers have all manner of CPE's that 
may or may not support this. Having unique designs per customer does not 
scale well.

> Or private/enterprise-private

Yeah, don't like that, although I understand why some operators use it.

> or unnumbered and route them the single /32 to use for their NAT on 
> say a loopback interface.

Same as the CPE issue I described above.

> And the /29 ? I would reserve it but not assign it without a formal 
> request.

We have some products that can be considered sub-DIA that do not come 
with the /29 as standard. Those tend to be the majority of the market.

> Either you have lots of fallow ground or very few customers.

A bit of both.

Our main business is wholesale IP Transit. The Enterprise piece is 
growing, but we are not trying to save the world. It's a specific focus, 
and we don't do consumer.

> I dont see how this strategy would work elsewhere.

To be honest, we'll keep using IPv4 for as long as we have it, and for 
as long as we can get it from AFRINIC. But it's not where we are betting 
the farm - that is for IPv6.

> Your sales people are right. Since you can deliver quite usable 
> service that enables them to operate just as they have before with a 
> single /32, and with technical advantages to yourself, all the extra 
> wasted integers should be bringing in value.

At the risk of using IP addresses to prop uo sales numbers, and then you 
run out sooner because one customer decided to pay lots of $$ for a /22, 
even when they don't need it. Not the kind of potato I want to taste, 
because we have seen that proposed far too many times to know it will 
become a reality when the commissions are due.

Mark.