On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 08:40 +0200, Garry Glendown wrote:
On 17.09.2012 05:27, Randy Bush wrote:
gedanken experiment
o cut last/8 allocations to lirs back to /24 Most likely too small to do anything meaningful with ...
Anyway, I've been wondering for a while - how many new ISPs (or LIRs, for that matter) have been founded over the last - say - 2 years? Given the technical requirements as far as performance and bandwidths go, and the low end user prices for Internet connectivity, I don't see how there are any feasible business models to start an ISP business nowadays... this poses the question whether saving v4 addresses for new ISPs/LIRs is even relevant ...
Any future upstart-ISP *NEED* IPv4 space to do CGN. A small block is sufficient. Not having access to it is tricky w.r.t competition legislation (the holders of IPv4 not selling some to new-comers, thus blocking the market or whatever). This isn't an argument pro or con PIv4-from-last-/8 in itself, unless ISP operations are restricted to companies that are also LIRs, which, well, it isn't. For the record-keepers, I'm pro 2012-04. In my opinion, a real solution to the above problem is not found in the distribution model of an extremely limited amount of space (last /8). And we're going there anyway (to the situation requiring the real solution), I would just like us to get there sooner rather than later so we can stop fumbling for non-solutions. It gets us IPv6 faster, is my theory. And it's of course debatable whether new-LIR cost for /22 contra PI-process for /24. The opportunistic PI-applications are probably quite limited in volume? However, need for address space is somewhat in-elastic, like having gas in your car when driving to work. Many enterprises need it regardless of its form and will easily pay 3.5 EUR/address for one or several /22. FFWD, plz. Best, M