Re: [NNagain] ip address exhaustion podcast

[Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>]

Dear Mike:

I am going to flat out refuse to discuss the ultimate use of the 6% of
the internet's "future" allocations here, today, in light of the other
issues I raised in the podcast that I think are more important, that I
hope people will take a timeout to think about. This tool, showing the
mis-allocated ipv4 address map, is very enlightening, for the newer
persons here:

https://map.bgp.tools/

It is kind of similar to the FCC wireless spectrum map. I used to keep
a copy of that on my wall with a tiny circle and arrow pointing at the
paltry 2.4ghz allocation and all the great things we did with it. IP
space is a similar problem.

In that tool you can zoom in on tons of empty space, controlled by
entities that do not care. I pushed hard during the runup to bead's
challenge process to not only do speedtests but map the cybergeography
and ipv6 available between ISPs, and to date, failed. I strongly agree
that rather than pursuing the 240 option that more of these more well
defined spaces be made available for public use. Somehow.

...

As for more and more CGNAT vs ipv6, I am reminded of an analogy why
direct addressing helps. My postal address in nicaragua, used to be

1 block contiguous east of hotel joxi,
San Juan Del Sur
Nicaragua

Which is kind of analogous to how regular NAT works today.

CGNAT is more like:

go 22 miles west of Rivas, Nicaragua, on one of the 32000 roads
(ports) if available
Take a left turn at the main stop light
go 3 blocks
go south 1 block to Hotel Joxi (ask the desk if they have any ports
available for NAT too)
go east 1 block
knock on the door to see if anyone is home
deliver the packet

On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 9:20 AM Mikael Abrahamsson via Nnagain
<nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 Feb 2024, Dave Taht via Nnagain wrote:
>
> > renting the allocations they own to their customers. (The 240/4 "for
> > future use" problem is a relative distraction, honestly! but amazon's
> > use of it *all* does irk me, as I had intended that space be used for
> > all of humanity). Certainly by finally charging for their IPV4
>
> The fact that it's now used internally in places, is yet another reason it
> will never show up in the global routing table.
>
> Turning 240/4 into something usable on the wider Internet is a futile
> fight. It's however good for internal use as IPv4 already often needs
> translation boxes to talk to the global Internet (DFZ). So the work
> already done on making end systems able to use 240/4 is fine, but it also
> meant it's now used for internal things. So the fight should be to make it
> into proper RFC1918 style addresses for internal use so everybody agrees
> what's going on.
>
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike@swm.pp.se
> _______________________________________________
> Nnagain mailing list
> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain



-- 
40 years of net history, a couple songs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9RGX6QFm5E
Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos