From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 531783B29E for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 07:29:06 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1695468541; x=1696073341; i=moeller0@gmx.de; bh=faGda+3MWocQLWBCd0h3U/HbTeDgdJjbWf6W/ZL0v7o=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=Oxw05425hX34JpZepB9qrDaL3KDYp56gfb8ymSBF/OFU0f4ftZNfPxcaKI7QwTb5MMeoKlFDS3m FF5ZtpjrV5Wyp4q/rRTlVGbPamO5GzBb5mpDfMqN2pLm1dY76V4HcP0Q99qPav8bpyzHq7CbguT4C gkxjYGMSWOF4XCA/Gvv/4usgJHA6NeU7DzpUKGN/KxoLYsmZ5N+2rqWMpoAp3SfzhWKn8l80czPpJ KidbsibiSxSYK4sszkRZYDt1ZEkfUeNvZtVVgBw/B1EPS9xyca6e1fZcJoumYsJXhtYfripPuNGdb yr5WaENVUswSfh6lJPkNump2D+H7EIqe/6rg== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from smtpclient.apple ([77.0.84.190]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N3KPq-1rispT0c1C-010PR4; Sat, 23 Sep 2023 13:29:01 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.120.41.1.4\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: <1ad0e825-bacc-4dd4-9526-1554d66a41f9@auckland.ac.nz> Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 13:28:59 +0200 Cc: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7EB4E450-D3D9-4159-8870-BA3EA97E47EA@gmx.de> References: <9d96e8d6-8a40-4353-b7a3-49881742f1a7@auckland.ac.nz> <83e9b47895d019d282e21bbdd4f4cc57@ausics.net> <1ad0e825-bacc-4dd4-9526-1554d66a41f9@auckland.ac.nz> To: Ulrich Speidel X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3696.120.41.1.4) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:KvLgYrhf+UKgFmrTXVAtZde3s0utKTrpNG6+CRBfY6wu+dzz1V1 78cqIJekX2QVQrP5YjCHW1FX7EXEwpI3KR0gV66j+FOxCei2Ce2CBegaBIRpiazodRtDEdT gadQ6+zi6hTWyjCINWmBfAp/s7xxaZWMdVU+lBO6uwLlz1o7zw72Ti3ehRcKShOYsJRmhQt PzGQDgJZqSUDUV3lWEYng== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:NkYYnpb47ik=;5VrO3SPwOt/GuPLUs8mUKqaAodh cZ0cRI+aq/TPpAjMElh5eZc8q21aga5gn5qkMT6fREKgWD7ojuAU/g8VvoLn2IvohCi/8H9xK qj2tDHoF/ITPJK+6t/VuDbb2qRbVY1zPhBNWIes89sFdVwWDXEnCIzcl8SZO4Jqr9BB9y15Ce shzatR6XC5m91geMT7Z8mjWq2ZCqSLqW9+6zUU2QJ3b9jbDCtSRyyUtGBhXDN76fOIV3YLWda 8oZxgyX+GyiHOtalhGNIme3EpUR5m8oX1V6HOP2rwoc0Xh3YB0vcSX2Tf+5urf20/07s5iIPi FSSe1Q9j23z6zhb9p8SiPOTdPtIj6R9NpfujpdHw/bAs+coDaoQUThxH/MZir+si/mbih6osx jJvJEF5jBpSSDaicO+3xtpTr6+IpTFrnhICippAlWoBQEB/IhwW/4rPycVK2fHQGQWO2nEZru 26Q//2RflZ4kMw3cigI3KsT21RLyAUGUbZwJBtwtIdEWMkFH1gr69bceEsQgkpsszU0JWAK8u oB/4mCzBVddxk3z5XeSKk4wPcKQlPy331lmSoHefdxTpYeL8dC9Nmt2xiKTx2faKaE5Y1DfFW iuS7063egUjANJV4/DfVQEHx6ngo+UJdHwyEzaDWe7vgFeqrMcVruSvFWlYHToBgWFm4u1mso 1zRAEGnivAf5ZsgD52DHNoes2TtadI4U58Zq7LNswDCP8hDza5+BmoYcIZ6HdA4pWjAgi5pQz kYj7PKt7nYsJzITydRn1dUinDqKe17AYbXTpYyV5L02Is6YJm5asJuM/K/MqaQRUudyxz5Qb2 N+ZwE+0qV5v3A+6t6yeqfbUdMlymtoWhE7WuQ/378VKkbx0odCOPpXDS8lQfAbnifn0OaN442 +GcIy73iJyRqZiNMIPEhZWiHaJTZ6tpeIgsN1NttzqQ3vNZezqBVnbMzXCh3N5rZfAJLCzvsC ixgXU6KmAdPjSJcpvpkTRUtw/yk= Subject: Re: [Starlink] APNIC56 last week X-BeenThere: starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: "Starlink has bufferbloat. Bad." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2023 11:29:06 -0000 Hi Ulrich, nice tangential discussion. I guess what we might expect is some = "Kipp-Punkt"/tipping-point at which acquiring new IPv4 becomes cost = prohibitive enough so new deployments go IPv6 only, at which point the = existing IPv4 offers might devaluate pretty quickly... Now, if IPv6 = would have been made more like IPv4 this would be considerably easier (I = am thinking DHPCv6 and Android devices here, and I am only speaking of = ease of deployment; I accept there are valid reasons for a SLAAC-only = position like Android's). The US$1 million (or better 3.5 Million) = question is when this tipping-point will be? Tangent: German ISPs tend to charge ~5EUR/month extra for static public = IPv4 addresses so over a typical 24 month contract period can easily = tolerate a cost of 5*24 =3D 120 EUR for an IPv4 address (that will = afterwards still be in the ISP's property). They typically provision = either full DualStack (from the incumbent sitting on a large pile of = IPv4s) or ds-lite and for a few unfortunate one's CG-NAT-IPv4 only. But = even the IPv6 addresses/prefixes are typically dynamically assigned with = relative short renewal periods (like 24 hours).=20 Regards Sebastian P.S.: My personal gripes with IPv6 are much smaller, I mostly miss stuff = like ICMP timestamps in ICMPv6 and the IP timestamp option in IPv6*, or = the fact that privacy extensions (as well intended as they are) make it = harder for novice users to actually use their IPv6 globally routable = addresses to make services available. *) I think I understand the limitations of both ICMP and IP timestamps = compared to the more elaborate alternatives that have been RFC'd as = alternatives and that apparently convinced team IPv6 to not carry these = things over from IPv4, but boy, no amount of higher temporal precision = makes up for the point that many deployed servers today happily respond = tp ICMP/IP timestamp requests, ubiquity in itself is a major asset. > On Sep 23, 2023, at 12:53, Ulrich Speidel via Starlink = wrote: >=20 > On 23/09/2023 4:22 pm, Noel Butler via Starlink wrote: >> IPv6 is only 4% of traffic that hits my Mail Servers, it's less than = 1% on my Web servers. >> Just like TCP, it wont be going anywhere, not quietly, and if it were = to, likely be long after I'm gone, QUIC seems an interesting project, = and I guess only the decades ahead of us will tell of it becomes a = raging success. >=20 > Now what that tells me is that you and those that use your mail / web = servers are within networks that are either in networks that are old and = have legacy IPv4 allocations, or that are new, desparate, and rich. And = Geoff, if you asked him, would tell you that this is perfectly fine by = him - as long as you're happy with it. In fact, I can recall a = presentation of his not too long ago (APNIC54, AINTEC22?) where he said = pretty much exactly that he didn't foresee a rapid demise of IPv4. >=20 > But if you look at the Internet as a whole - and Geoff does, in a very = ingenious way, I might add - then we notice that the percentage of IPv6 = out there has been growing steadily. IPv6 is now what about half of = Internet users use. Maybe not the folk that visit your services, but = Internet users nonetheless. So you're in the process of being = outnumbered. But that's perhaps of academic interest only, for now, at = least. >=20 > What's a bit more pertinent in some respects is a point that Vint = brought up, and this is that if you want a new IPv4 address these days, = you will generally need to buy it from someone who has an allocation. Or = lease it - which is a little controversial, but not a debate I'm wanting = to enter here. Let's stay with the buying price tag for a moment. >=20 > I came home from APNIC54 last year with the insight that my employer's = /16 IPv4 allocation was worth around US$3.5 million. Since we've had the = /16 for ages, I started wondering whether this was even on our asset = list. I was pretty sure that it ought to be. Turns out it wasn't - when = every $100 monitor in our place is. So I started asking questions and am = told that there was a hastily arranged meeting between IT and Finance. >=20 > The upshot is that we now have a $3.5m asset on our books that may = appreciate or depreciate, and people who are responsible for managing = it. In fact, I dug a bit further and found a total of around NZ$100m = worth of IPv4 addresses in NZ's public sector, including a /16 held by a = government department that wasn't part of any AS. NZ's auditor general's = office told me that they expected public sector agencies to list IPv4 = holdings on their balance sheets. >=20 > Why is this important? Because otherwise, there is nothing that stops = an individual with access to your RIR account from transferring your = IPv4 holdings to whichever party they so desire. If the addresses are = not on your asset list, then there's nothing that documents that you own = the value that is inherent in them and thus nothing to sue anyone for. = One imagines this as the ultimate stunt that a disgruntled sysadmin = might pull off before they leave your employ. >=20 > But let's get back to that newly-found asset that we now have to = manage. Your next CGNAT now becomes an investment in making that = newly-found asset a little less tradable. A bit like putting a shiny new = building right onto the only access way to your back sections you've = just been told you can actually develop. >=20 > Of course, this only applies to folk who sit on larger address blocks = - for a /24, it won't make much of a difference on the balance sheet. >=20 > --=20 >=20 > **************************************************************** > Dr. Ulrich Speidel >=20 > School of Computer Science >=20 > Room 303S.594 (City Campus) >=20 > The University of Auckland > u.speidel@auckland.ac.nz > http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~ulrich/ > **************************************************************** >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Starlink mailing list > Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink