Interesting IP count
Hi Colleuages: Today I come across an very interesting article which I'd like to share with your guys and see what your guys think about it. http://ilia.ws/archives/236-ISP-Popularity-by-Domain-Count.html If what said in the article was true(which it should be as all the data from the article should be public data), if all the cable network start to use NAT, just in sense of domains, we might have IP supply for few more decades. And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet. In which, is that service can use NAT in sometime future? I talked to an UK telecom provider one day in a ripe lunch, he told me that their network is already partly using NAT(sorry I didn't remember his name, but I am sure he is on this mailing list), and he only need a /21 for entire network. And another thing was, I heard from one of my friend in the Apanic meeting, that someone is selling entire A class there for 10 USD/ IP. We don't know if there is already some successful story there regarding IP sales. But seems to me, based on what happened on Asian now, at least in China, as I heard from many of my colleagues there, there was no real shortage there at this time. No body goes bankrupt because of no IPs left. So that raise an interesting point, since 60% of the world domain is in fact wasted, is that the same story with IP usage. After all, we allocated almost half of the pool before RIR even exists. The current way of IP distributing results a very noneffective way of "past business" IP usage as well(e.g. someone changed their business from cable business to an enterprise business, of course that guy will not return Ripe NCC his additional free 2 M IPs). So when their is a real market for IPv4, and all the latency space come to sale, will we last much much longer than everybody expected? We our-self have few dozen of enterprise customers, and they are already paying 3-5 USD/ month /IP for years, as asking them to re-program their software and re-provision their business into IPv6, the cost will be enormous for them, and one more thing is, most software writers don't really like IPv6, as it is hard to remember and hard to type(it will be a whole lot easier if you just remember the IP and type it every time you have to do so, rather than copy paste, we all know the reason). So, even IP price eventually raise to 30USD even 50USD, it is still very hard for them to switch it over to IPv6 as long as they don't have IPv6-only client, because they are paying this amount of money for IP per year anyway. Another thing is, one thing aside from RIR meetings and ISP meetings, we didn't really hear a lot about IPv6. IPv6 come into developer is still something new and interesting, and one guy I talked in the IPv6 workshop in the Ripe64, a software developer for an Austria local company, who don't even know that IPv6 has been around for almost a decades. Since Ripe is almost finish it's public pools, my last question is, will one day all the wasted IP address being effectively picked up because of existing marketplace, and that market place will last us another 3 decades before we really going to IPv6 ear? Go Ipv6 Pro Last forever(this reason doesn't really come into play because it this can be a reason convince enterprise customer then it should be done 10 years ago.). unlimited amount of address space.(same as above) cost reasons. con: need new router new config new practice and testing almost every part of the business(from software to hardware). very hard to remember and write. (welcome to add more on this list) IPv4 pro you know how it works it works for all of our business life. it is easy to remember con cost reasons. But let's look at how much we are paying Ripe NCC now, for large ones, they are paying more coffee in the office than they are paying Ripe thing. So does that really hurts them when they pay 20USD per IP, look at their margin and their current costs structure, I would say for most business, it should be fine. If there is enough supply in the market for next decades, and keep the price well below 50 USD per IP, I believe 99% of business would accept this price and go on with their life. History already tell us most of us don't look too far to the future(otherwise we are already there). Hope my a bit of 2 cents can get more interesting thoughts come around. -- -- Kind regards. Lu This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet.
Dedicated Servers/VPS/Colocation and Datacenter services in General i guess.
In which, is that service can use NAT in sometime future?
Unlikely to impossible. William (RIPE: WW - LIR: at.edisgmbh - M: william@edis.at) Sent from my iPhone Am 05.06.2012 um 00:22 schrieb Lu Heng <h.lu@anytimechinese.com>:
And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet.
In which, is that service can use NAT in sometime future?
Hi The world has about 50m of servers. that including everything. and we have almost 378 m of IP pools. we can give 8 ip per server if we really want. On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:26 AM, William Weber <ripe-members-discussion@edisglobal.com> wrote:
And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet.
Dedicated Servers/VPS/Colocation and Datacenter services in General i guess.
In which, is that service can use NAT in sometime future?
Unlikely to impossible.
William (RIPE: WW - LIR: at.edisgmbh - M: william@edis.at)
Sent from my iPhone
Am 05.06.2012 um 00:22 schrieb Lu Heng <h.lu@anytimechinese.com>:
And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet.
In which, is that service can use NAT in sometime future?
---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
-- This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
Hi William, Lu & others,
And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet.
Dedicated Servers/VPS/Colocation and Datacenter services in General i guess.
Don't forget SSL hosting. Also a lot of hosting companies provide extra IP's for management like IPO, so instead of only 1 IP per server, they would require a second IP per server. Some things could be improved here if hosting companies would only allow that kind of connections on private IP's via a central VPN box. However valid, I don't expect hosting companies to change their behavior in conserving IP's up to a point where they are running out. A question that I have, is will we see (do we expect) implementations of reverse proxies in front of (shared) hosting environments ? It would make things more complex to troubleshoot, but with the current speed of implementations in the field ... I wouldn't be surprised if we would. Regards, Erik Bais
Am 05.06.12 09:42, schrieb Erik Bais:
Hi William, Lu & others,
And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet.
Dedicated Servers/VPS/Colocation and Datacenter services in General i guess.
Don't forget SSL hosting.
As far as I know, over 95% of all relevant browsers are currently SNI capable. There are only few exceptions, and even fewer notable ones. Most of the exceptions (IE on XP etc.) are dying out steadily. Just my two cents, --ck -- filoo GmbH Dr. Christopher Kunz E-Mail: chris@filoo.de Tel.: (+49) 0 52 41 8 67 30 -18 Fax: (+49) 0 52 41 / 8 67 30 -20 Please sign & encrypt mail wherever possible, my key: C882 8ED1 7DD1 9011 C088 EA50 5CFA 2EEB 397A CAC1 Moltkestraße 25a 33330 Gütersloh HRB4355, AG Gütersloh Geschäftsführer: S.Grewing, J.Rehpöhler, Dr. C.Kunz Filoo im Web: http://www.filoo.de/ Folgen Sie uns auf Twitter: http://twitter.com/filoogmbh Werden Sie unser Fan auf Facebook: http://facebook.com/filoogmbh
Hi On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Dr. Christopher Kunz <chris@filoo.de> wrote:
Am 05.06.12 09:42, schrieb Erik Bais:
Hi William, Lu & others,
And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet.
Dedicated Servers/VPS/Colocation and Datacenter services in General i guess.
Don't forget SSL hosting.
As far as I know, over 95% of all relevant browsers are currently SNI capable. There are only few exceptions, and even fewer notable ones. Most of the exceptions (IE on XP etc.) are dying out steadily.
That is very much depends on country though, in Germany or EU in general, IE was not the most popular browser for years, but XP+IE has been still holding huge amount of share in Asian or other developing market, after all, XP is still an functioning OS with minimum hardware requirement.
Just my two cents,
--ck
-- filoo GmbH Dr. Christopher Kunz
E-Mail: chris@filoo.de Tel.: (+49) 0 52 41 8 67 30 -18 Fax: (+49) 0 52 41 / 8 67 30 -20
Please sign & encrypt mail wherever possible, my key: C882 8ED1 7DD1 9011 C088 EA50 5CFA 2EEB 397A CAC1
Moltkestraße 25a 33330 Gütersloh
HRB4355, AG Gütersloh Geschäftsführer: S.Grewing, J.Rehpöhler, Dr. C.Kunz
Filoo im Web: http://www.filoo.de/ Folgen Sie uns auf Twitter: http://twitter.com/filoogmbh Werden Sie unser Fan auf Facebook: http://facebook.com/filoogmbh
---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
-- -- Kind regards. Lu This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
On 06/05/2012 10:00 AM, Dr. Christopher Kunz wrote:
Am 05.06.12 09:42, schrieb Erik Bais:
Hi William, Lu & others,
And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet.
Dedicated Servers/VPS/Colocation and Datacenter services in General i guess.
Don't forget SSL hosting.
As far as I know, over 95% of all relevant browsers are currently SNI capable. There are only few exceptions, and even fewer notable ones. Most of the exceptions (IE on XP etc.) are dying out steadily.
SNI would be really great to have. But according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication#No_support browsers on XP (which you mentioned; IE and Safari) and Android 2.x as well as some things like wget (maybe distributions supply it patched nowadays?) are the pain I see with that solution. XP is not yet really dead, as is Android 2.x - unfortunately for both. Regards, Stefan
Dear Lu (and others), From what I understand you have doubts about how serious IPv6 is and why it's needed. You also carefully lay down some arguments and datapoints, which I appreciate. This topic has been discussed multiple times before on this list, nevertheless I think it will not hurt anybody if we go over some of the aspects of this subject again. Members-discuss@, I urge you to come forward with arguments why IPv6 is so desperately needed and invalidate what Lu Heng brought to the list. I would love to compile all reasoning into a document to be used in IPv6 workshops. Regarding the pro's and con's you've written: - I agree IPv6 addresses are hard to remember, this is something that will not change, try to use automated DNS everywhere - In terms of routing, IPv6 is just 96 bits more of address space, that's mostly what has changed. - My guess is that IPv4 will but be available to everybody who needs it... up until somewhere in the year 2013 (RIPE region). Maybe you can put consumer subscribers behind NAT's, but there are only so many portforwards you can make on inbound tcp/25 or tcp/443. In these dark times I always enjoy listening to Randy Bush's soothing voice, this is a short video I recommend watching: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh3i6lDqWBM Kind regards, Job On 5 jun. 2012, at 00:22, Lu Heng wrote:
Hi Colleuages:
Today I come across an very interesting article which I'd like to share with your guys and see what your guys think about it.
http://ilia.ws/archives/236-ISP-Popularity-by-Domain-Count.html
If what said in the article was true(which it should be as all the data from the article should be public data), if all the cable network start to use NAT, just in sense of domains, we might have IP supply for few more decades.
And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet.
In which, is that service can use NAT in sometime future?
I talked to an UK telecom provider one day in a ripe lunch, he told me that their network is already partly using NAT(sorry I didn't remember his name, but I am sure he is on this mailing list), and he only need a /21 for entire network.
And another thing was, I heard from one of my friend in the Apanic meeting, that someone is selling entire A class there for 10 USD/ IP.
We don't know if there is already some successful story there regarding IP sales. But seems to me, based on what happened on Asian now, at least in China, as I heard from many of my colleagues there, there was no real shortage there at this time.
No body goes bankrupt because of no IPs left.
So that raise an interesting point, since 60% of the world domain is in fact wasted, is that the same story with IP usage. After all, we allocated almost half of the pool before RIR even exists.
The current way of IP distributing results a very noneffective way of "past business" IP usage as well(e.g. someone changed their business from cable business to an enterprise business, of course that guy will not return Ripe NCC his additional free 2 M IPs).
So when their is a real market for IPv4, and all the latency space come to sale, will we last much much longer than everybody expected?
We our-self have few dozen of enterprise customers, and they are already paying 3-5 USD/ month /IP for years, as asking them to re-program their software and re-provision their business into IPv6, the cost will be enormous for them, and one more thing is, most software writers don't really like IPv6, as it is hard to remember and hard to type(it will be a whole lot easier if you just remember the IP and type it every time you have to do so, rather than copy paste, we all know the reason). So, even IP price eventually raise to 30USD even 50USD, it is still very hard for them to switch it over to IPv6 as long as they don't have IPv6-only client, because they are paying this amount of money for IP per year anyway.
Another thing is, one thing aside from RIR meetings and ISP meetings, we didn't really hear a lot about IPv6. IPv6 come into developer is still something new and interesting, and one guy I talked in the IPv6 workshop in the Ripe64, a software developer for an Austria local company, who don't even know that IPv6 has been around for almost a decades.
Since Ripe is almost finish it's public pools, my last question is, will one day all the wasted IP address being effectively picked up because of existing marketplace, and that market place will last us another 3 decades before we really going to IPv6 ear?
Go Ipv6 Pro Last forever(this reason doesn't really come into play because it this can be a reason convince enterprise customer then it should be done 10 years ago.). unlimited amount of address space.(same as above) cost reasons. con: need new router new config new practice and testing almost every part of the business(from software to hardware). very hard to remember and write. (welcome to add more on this list)
IPv4 pro you know how it works it works for all of our business life. it is easy to remember con cost reasons.
But let's look at how much we are paying Ripe NCC now, for large ones, they are paying more coffee in the office than they are paying Ripe thing. So does that really hurts them when they pay 20USD per IP, look at their margin and their current costs structure, I would say for most business, it should be fine.
If there is enough supply in the market for next decades, and keep the price well below 50 USD per IP, I believe 99% of business would accept this price and go on with their life.
History already tell us most of us don't look too far to the future(otherwise we are already there).
Hope my a bit of 2 cents can get more interesting thoughts come around.
-- -- Kind regards. Lu
This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
Hi First I am sorry for the number provide in the last email was not correct, it should be 3.7B IP, in which left us about 80 IPs/server. Second I want to make perfect clear that I have no doubts about how serious IPv6 is, and how urgent we need to do it. Just this article I saw today, in which I think it might be very interesting to share with fellow colleagues as we are wasting 60% of total world IP, and I guess we wasted about half of our IP pools as well. But Job you are perfectly right, this topic most of us has come over multiple times, and I am sorry to bring this up again. As I have been to Asian a lot, which is the first region out of IP spaces, but I find out most of my Chinese colleagues have never worried about IP issues. Even China telecom are charging over 10USD/month/IP, most ISP are just ok with it. because end of the day, 10USD/month isn't a lot for enterprise customer. NAT has limited functionality, yes, but for most cable network users, that functionality is enough for them. And, I just want to say that I am sharing few of my thoughts these days about our IP problems, while I come across Atlantic in the past few months and the thoughts and talk I had with people in different regions and different organizations. Hope it helps:) On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> wrote:
Dear Lu (and others),
From what I understand you have doubts about how serious IPv6 is and why it's needed. You also carefully lay down some arguments and datapoints, which I appreciate. This topic has been discussed multiple times before on this list, nevertheless I think it will not hurt anybody if we go over some of the aspects of this subject again.
Members-discuss@, I urge you to come forward with arguments why IPv6 is so desperately needed and invalidate what Lu Heng brought to the list. I would love to compile all reasoning into a document to be used in IPv6 workshops.
Regarding the pro's and con's you've written:
- I agree IPv6 addresses are hard to remember, this is something that will not change, try to use automated DNS everywhere - In terms of routing, IPv6 is just 96 bits more of address space, that's mostly what has changed. - My guess is that IPv4 will but be available to everybody who needs it... up until somewhere in the year 2013 (RIPE region). Maybe you can put consumer subscribers behind NAT's, but there are only so many portforwards you can make on inbound tcp/25 or tcp/443.
In these dark times I always enjoy listening to Randy Bush's soothing voice, this is a short video I recommend watching: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh3i6lDqWBM
Kind regards,
Job
On 5 jun. 2012, at 00:22, Lu Heng wrote:
Hi Colleuages:
Today I come across an very interesting article which I'd like to share with your guys and see what your guys think about it.
http://ilia.ws/archives/236-ISP-Popularity-by-Domain-Count.html
If what said in the article was true(which it should be as all the data from the article should be public data), if all the cable network start to use NAT, just in sense of domains, we might have IP supply for few more decades.
And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet.
In which, is that service can use NAT in sometime future?
I talked to an UK telecom provider one day in a ripe lunch, he told me that their network is already partly using NAT(sorry I didn't remember his name, but I am sure he is on this mailing list), and he only need a /21 for entire network.
And another thing was, I heard from one of my friend in the Apanic meeting, that someone is selling entire A class there for 10 USD/ IP.
We don't know if there is already some successful story there regarding IP sales. But seems to me, based on what happened on Asian now, at least in China, as I heard from many of my colleagues there, there was no real shortage there at this time.
No body goes bankrupt because of no IPs left.
So that raise an interesting point, since 60% of the world domain is in fact wasted, is that the same story with IP usage. After all, we allocated almost half of the pool before RIR even exists.
The current way of IP distributing results a very noneffective way of "past business" IP usage as well(e.g. someone changed their business from cable business to an enterprise business, of course that guy will not return Ripe NCC his additional free 2 M IPs).
So when their is a real market for IPv4, and all the latency space come to sale, will we last much much longer than everybody expected?
We our-self have few dozen of enterprise customers, and they are already paying 3-5 USD/ month /IP for years, as asking them to re-program their software and re-provision their business into IPv6, the cost will be enormous for them, and one more thing is, most software writers don't really like IPv6, as it is hard to remember and hard to type(it will be a whole lot easier if you just remember the IP and type it every time you have to do so, rather than copy paste, we all know the reason). So, even IP price eventually raise to 30USD even 50USD, it is still very hard for them to switch it over to IPv6 as long as they don't have IPv6-only client, because they are paying this amount of money for IP per year anyway.
Another thing is, one thing aside from RIR meetings and ISP meetings, we didn't really hear a lot about IPv6. IPv6 come into developer is still something new and interesting, and one guy I talked in the IPv6 workshop in the Ripe64, a software developer for an Austria local company, who don't even know that IPv6 has been around for almost a decades.
Since Ripe is almost finish it's public pools, my last question is, will one day all the wasted IP address being effectively picked up because of existing marketplace, and that market place will last us another 3 decades before we really going to IPv6 ear?
Go Ipv6 Pro Last forever(this reason doesn't really come into play because it this can be a reason convince enterprise customer then it should be done 10 years ago.). unlimited amount of address space.(same as above) cost reasons. con: need new router new config new practice and testing almost every part of the business(from software to hardware). very hard to remember and write. (welcome to add more on this list)
IPv4 pro you know how it works it works for all of our business life. it is easy to remember con cost reasons.
But let's look at how much we are paying Ripe NCC now, for large ones, they are paying more coffee in the office than they are paying Ripe thing. So does that really hurts them when they pay 20USD per IP, look at their margin and their current costs structure, I would say for most business, it should be fine.
If there is enough supply in the market for next decades, and keep the price well below 50 USD per IP, I believe 99% of business would accept this price and go on with their life.
History already tell us most of us don't look too far to the future(otherwise we are already there).
Hope my a bit of 2 cents can get more interesting thoughts come around.
-- -- Kind regards. Lu
This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
-- -- Kind regards. Lu This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
Hi Lu Heng, On 5 jun. 2012, at 01:03, Lu Heng wrote:
Second I want to make perfect clear that I have no doubts about how serious IPv6 is, and how urgent we need to do it.
:-)
But Job you are perfectly right, this topic most of us has come over multiple times, and I am sorry to bring this up again.
No, do not feel sorry, IP economics change over time. Especially given that World IPv6 Laundry day is around the corner, it's worth discussing.
As I have been to Asian a lot, which is the first region out of IP spaces, but I find out most of my Chinese colleagues have never worried about IP issues. Even China telecom are charging over 10USD/month/IP, most ISP are just ok with it. because end of the day, 10USD/month isn't a lot for enterprise customer.
You are talking about _today_ I assume. I think at some point the cost of maintaining IPv4 space will be higher than just deploying IPv6 on the devices that talk to other continents.
NAT has limited functionality, yes, but for most cable network users, that functionality is enough for them.
Might be true, but I like a world where everybody can run any service on their IP addresses without jumping through NAT hoops. Kind regards, Job
Hi Job On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> wrote:
Hi Lu Heng,
On 5 jun. 2012, at 01:03, Lu Heng wrote:
Second I want to make perfect clear that I have no doubts about how serious IPv6 is, and how urgent we need to do it.
:-)
But Job you are perfectly right, this topic most of us has come over multiple times, and I am sorry to bring this up again.
No, do not feel sorry, IP economics change over time. Especially given that World IPv6 Laundry day is around the corner, it's worth discussing.
Thanks:)
As I have been to Asian a lot, which is the first region out of IP spaces, but I find out most of my Chinese colleagues have never worried about IP issues. Even China telecom are charging over 10USD/month/IP, most ISP are just ok with it. because end of the day, 10USD/month isn't a lot for enterprise customer.
You are talking about _today_ I assume. I think at some point the cost of maintaining IPv4 space will be higher than just deploying IPv6 on the devices that talk to other continents.
No, what I mean here is, the real economically pressure that at least from my experiences with current enterprise customer, they don't really have any, because IP has been THE most profitable thing for almost all major commercial ISPs, look at this way, we get IP for free, and we sell it at what, 10,20,50 even sometime 100USD per year per IP. If we looking at the real rate the enterprise customer are paying for today, it is not really much of hurry for them to rush for the IPv6 at all--they paying this costs for years anyway. The video you have showed, randy was perfect right in the video, one day, we will hit a wall that will make our IPv4 costs so high that we have to go IPv6, but the question is, when? We know we are going to running out of IP address 20 years ago, but look at today's market you will find out that not many people are even heard of IPv6, it always be an "new and interesting and far future" thing.
NAT has limited functionality, yes, but for most cable network users, that functionality is enough for them.
Might be true, but I like a world where everybody can run any service on their IP addresses without jumping through NAT hoops.
We are jumping though NAT hoops already these days, look at Chinese market, the largest internet user base, they are living an happy life with their carrier NAT for years. And another thing is, US are wasting enormous amount of IPs nowadays, they have less user base then China, but they are using about 10 times more than China, if we can make US use their IPs more effectively, in which I it might be as the market price come into play, the intention of re-writing software to support v6 might be well delayed for sometime.
Kind regards,
Job
-- -- Kind regards. Lu This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
Hi And I just find another interesting number of internet user base. Internet users worldwide by regions, year-end 2011 (December 2011): WORLDWIDE: 2,267,233,742 - Asia: 1,016,799,076 (44.8% of internet users worldwide) - Europe: 500,723,686 (22.1%) - North America: 273,067,546 (12.0%) - Latin America / Caribbean: 235,819,740 (10.4%) - Africa: 139,875,242 (6.2%) - Middle East: 77,020,995 (3.4%) - Oceania / Australia: 23,927,457 (1.1%) So, US are using 40% of total world IP supply for it's 10% of world internet user base, while asian for years, is using about 10% of world IP address to supply 40% of internet user base. In which, tells us that if US can free us even half of it's IP address space, that will supply us maybe another decades. On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:30 AM, Lu Heng <h.lu@anytimechinese.com> wrote:
Hi Job
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> wrote:
Hi Lu Heng,
On 5 jun. 2012, at 01:03, Lu Heng wrote:
Second I want to make perfect clear that I have no doubts about how serious IPv6 is, and how urgent we need to do it.
:-)
But Job you are perfectly right, this topic most of us has come over multiple times, and I am sorry to bring this up again.
No, do not feel sorry, IP economics change over time. Especially given that World IPv6 Laundry day is around the corner, it's worth discussing.
Thanks:)
As I have been to Asian a lot, which is the first region out of IP spaces, but I find out most of my Chinese colleagues have never worried about IP issues. Even China telecom are charging over 10USD/month/IP, most ISP are just ok with it. because end of the day, 10USD/month isn't a lot for enterprise customer.
You are talking about _today_ I assume. I think at some point the cost of maintaining IPv4 space will be higher than just deploying IPv6 on the devices that talk to other continents.
No, what I mean here is, the real economically pressure that at least from my experiences with current enterprise customer, they don't really have any, because IP has been THE most profitable thing for almost all major commercial ISPs, look at this way, we get IP for free, and we sell it at what, 10,20,50 even sometime 100USD per year per IP.
If we looking at the real rate the enterprise customer are paying for today, it is not really much of hurry for them to rush for the IPv6 at all--they paying this costs for years anyway.
The video you have showed, randy was perfect right in the video, one day, we will hit a wall that will make our IPv4 costs so high that we have to go IPv6, but the question is, when?
We know we are going to running out of IP address 20 years ago, but look at today's market you will find out that not many people are even heard of IPv6, it always be an "new and interesting and far future" thing.
NAT has limited functionality, yes, but for most cable network users, that functionality is enough for them.
Might be true, but I like a world where everybody can run any service on their IP addresses without jumping through NAT hoops.
We are jumping though NAT hoops already these days, look at Chinese market, the largest internet user base, they are living an happy life with their carrier NAT for years.
And another thing is, US are wasting enormous amount of IPs nowadays, they have less user base then China, but they are using about 10 times more than China, if we can make US use their IPs more effectively, in which I it might be as the market price come into play, the intention of re-writing software to support v6 might be well delayed for sometime.
Kind regards,
Job
-- -- Kind regards. Lu
This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
-- -- Kind regards. Lu This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
Hi, On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 01:54:09AM +0200, Lu Heng wrote:
In which, tells us that if US can free us even half of it's IP address space, that will supply us maybe another decades.
This would be very ill-spent effort. If we do the same stupid things a few more decades, like "write new software with IPv4 only, sell millions of phones and other gadgets with IPv4 only", migration to something reasonable will be much *harder*. If we had done the IPv6 thing 5 years ago already, hardly any mobile device would have been affected - today, there's millions of iThings and Androids that don't support IPv6 on 3G - stupid and avoidable pain. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
As far as i can see my iPhone (4, newest iOS) obtains an IPv6 by DHCP6 from my carrier over 3G so it *should* be able to use it. All my devices (iPhone, iPad, Android phone, my old Nokia even) get (and use + prefer) IPv6 in my home Wifi by DHCP6 from my Netgear router (which then tunnels to he.net since UPC Austria has no IPv6 officially). Anyway, that what follows is pretty offtopic - I'd like to share the IPv6 and IPv4 usage of some ISPs in Austria which might be interesting for you since we are a rather small (both in population and size) but highly connected country used often as a testbed for new tech (highest 3G usage rate in the EU, first 3G network in the EU, highest LTE usage rate in the EU etc etc) We have a few main ISPs here: UPC Telekom Austria And some smaller ones like Hotze.com and local networks and the mobile ISPs. So far you get a dynamic external IPv4 IP at most of them when using DSL, the smaller ISPs like Hotze and I3B usualy give one static IP per connection. UPC gives a "semi" static IP at cable connections (DHCP lease time is somewhere 2030 - i have my IP since over a year now) and Blizznet/D-Light (FTTH providers) use only static IPs. Hotze and I3B have IPv6 - The BIG ones (UPC, Telekom) have no IPv6 at all, neither for private nor for business customers. Now the more interesting part, the mobile networks. We have the "usual bunch": Three (Drei) Orange (was: One) A1 (Telekom owned) T-Mobile Tele.Ring (was: Max Mobil) Three by default NATs any customer in 3G services in 10.x - You can disable this at their customer panel and thus obtain a public IP which is a very nice feature and surely helps to save IPs. Orange NATs in 192.168.x and seems to use public IPs sometimes when you are on EDGE - Business customers can obtain a static IPv4 for 1EUR / month. A1 uses NAT exclusively TMobile/Tele.Ring seem to use NAT also but i didn't try them. As you can see much here is based on NAT (at least mobile)… now you may ask, what about IPv6? Simply, IPv6 is not offered by ANY ISP here. My best guess is that maybe 100k, if not less, people in Austria use or are able to use IPv6 (either native or tunneled). -- William Weber | RIPE: WW | LIR: at.edisgmbh william@edisglobal.com | william@edis.at | http://edis.at | http://as57169.net Network in: Austria - Germany - France - Italy - Poland - UK - Netherlands - USA - Hong Kong EDIS GmbH (AS57169) NOC Graz, Austria Am 05.06.2012 um 09:55 schrieb Gert Doering:
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 01:54:09AM +0200, Lu Heng wrote:
In which, tells us that if US can free us even half of it's IP address space, that will supply us maybe another decades.
This would be very ill-spent effort.
If we do the same stupid things a few more decades, like "write new software with IPv4 only, sell millions of phones and other gadgets with IPv4 only", migration to something reasonable will be much *harder*.
If we had done the IPv6 thing 5 years ago already, hardly any mobile device would have been affected - today, there's millions of iThings and Androids that don't support IPv6 on 3G - stupid and avoidable pain.
Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
On Wed, 6 Jun 2012, William Weber wrote:
As far as i can see my iPhone (4, newest iOS) obtains an IPv6 by DHCP6 from my carrier over 3G so it *should* be able to use it. All my devices (iPhone, iPad, Android phone, my old Nokia even) get (and use + prefer) IPv6 in my home Wifi by DHCP6 from my Netgear router (which then tunnels to he.net since UPC Austria has no IPv6 officially).
To be exact - IPs are being given by RA not DHCP. Regards D.M.
Hi Thanks everybody for the discussion. Just want to make one point clear, I have no objection against developing IPv6 and implantation it, and in fact, in our business face, we are looking forward to develop IPv6. as I come across an article that has few interesting number on it, and as today is the world IPv6 day, I think it might be worth a bit to see if we can forecast the future better than we did yesterday. But again, IPv6 is the future and everybody should go for it. With regards. Lu On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:34 PM, Dariusz Margas <dariusz.margas@gazeta.pl>wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jun 2012, William Weber wrote:
As far as i can see my iPhone (4, newest iOS) obtains an IPv6 by DHCP6 from my carrier over 3G so it *should* be able to use it. All my devices (iPhone, iPad, Android phone, my old Nokia even) get (and use + prefer) IPv6 in my home Wifi by DHCP6 from my Netgear router (which then tunnels to he.net since UPC Austria has no IPv6 officially).
To be exact - IPs are being given by RA not DHCP.
Regards D.M.
---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
-- This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
Lu Heng wrote ...
So, US are using 40% of total world IP supply for it's 10% of world internet user base, while asian for years, is using about 10% of world IP address to supply 40% of internet user base.
In which, tells us that if US can free us even half of it's IP address space, that will supply us maybe another decades.
You make a *very* incorrect assumption: That the main use of IP addresses is "access" to the internet - completely ignoring all the devices/systems/networks/etc that hold those services you are accessing - the bulk of which are in the EU and US. IPv6 is not a new idea. Dual-Stacking is not a new idea. IMHO if you're still deploying systems and devices that only work v4 your business is about to die - attaching a bit of NAT based life-support isn't going to save it. Rob
On 06/05/2012 01:30 AM, Lu Heng wrote:
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Job Snijders <job@instituut.net> wrote:
On 5 jun. 2012, at 01:03, Lu Heng wrote:
[...]
NAT has limited functionality, yes, but for most cable network users, that functionality is enough for them.
Might be true, but I like a world where everybody can run any service on their IP addresses without jumping through NAT hoops.
We are jumping though NAT hoops already these days, look at Chinese market, the largest internet user base, they are living an happy life with their carrier NAT for years.
Well, they are living behind a big firewall anyway. So if we as non-Chinese worry about them doing NAT, maybe that should worry us more. Regards, Stefan
Hi, On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 12:47:26AM +0200, Job Snijders wrote:
Members-discuss@, I urge you to come forward with arguments why IPv6 is so desperately needed and invalidate what Lu Heng brought to the list. I would love to compile all reasoning into a document to be used in IPv6 workshops.
"end to end connectivity". If your ISP NATs you, you can't connect back to your home network by any means, and most of the peer2peer-applications will be broken. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
Hi On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Gert Doering <gert@space.net> wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 12:47:26AM +0200, Job Snijders wrote:
Members-discuss@, I urge you to come forward with arguments why IPv6 is so desperately needed and invalidate what Lu Heng brought to the list. I would love to compile all reasoning into a document to be used in IPv6 workshops.
"end to end connectivity".
If your ISP NATs you, you can't connect back to your home network by any means, and most of the peer2peer-applications will be broken.
You are right about connect back to home thing(but again, how many people really connect back to home, or even know that possibility exists, and what China telecom does with these business people(they are business people mostly), they charge extra for static IP address in which at cost of over 2000Euro/IP/year(that's why they are the most profitable ISP in the world) ), for p2p, there is already large amount of software has solved the problem,and just do not underestimate the people's technical ability about sharing. The biggest IPv6 traffic I have ever seen is in one of Chinese university in Beijing, the reason behind that is--school charge student for their IPv4 traffic but not IPv6 traffic, so they use IPv6 to download:)(about 5G/second) so example like that will tech us, end of the day, the cost is the most important thing, not many people really care about how long the future goes as long as it is not broken now, as long as people has no economical intensive to go for IPv6, then won't do that. But once the end user has the presure of money for going IPv6,then they will, but the core point I am raising here is: since end customer already paying somewhere around 10-100USD/IP/year, at current low IPv4 price, I didn't see much of economic intensive exits at the end user side(only in ISP side, but again, we have free lunch for past 20 years, does it really matter a lot for that free lunch raise it's price a bit in which still be a relative cheap price). So, let me summary my point, I believe current IPv4 price does not offer enough intensive for most of end user to go IPv6.Maybe we need about 100USD/IP to drive IPv6 into a everyday world. Just my 2 cents thought:) -- Kind regards. Lu This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
Hi, dear mailing list. On behalf of a medium retail ETTH ISP here in central Russia, I'd like to share a piece of CGNAT44 expirience with you. We are using it right from the start of the business for the 95% of our subscribers on their way to Internet. We've tried out several application approaches on this matter: single public IP with round robin port mapping to a 10.a.b/24 full of subscribers; random IP with session long port-block allocation of various ranges (64-1024 portblocks allocated per user at a time), while maintaining NAT behaviour requirements for TCP/UDP as per RFCs (major NAT traversal tricks as well). Number of ports required for a single user may vary in scale dramatically - simple websurfing takes 50-100 ports, while heavy p2p application can easily take 10K active connections, this Optimal port utilisation may be reached with up to 350-400 active users per public IP address without significant service degradation. This gives us around 2.5-3.5M IPv4 addresses required for a 1B users surfing internet and doing some serious p2p... So... an ISP can survive with this shortage and provide a "static public IP address" as a VAS - as it seems to me =) What bothers us is that it's still quiet difficult to get even as little as /21 IPv4 address as an additional allocation in case if we want to launch a new regional network... By the way - just while this discussion lasts, I've recieved 2 emails asking if we want to buy or sell any internet numbers =) 05.06.2012 2:22 пользователь "Lu Heng" <h.lu@anytimechinese.com> написал:
Hi Colleuages:
Today I come across an very interesting article which I'd like to share with your guys and see what your guys think about it.
http://ilia.ws/archives/236-ISP-Popularity-by-Domain-Count.html
If what said in the article was true(which it should be as all the data from the article should be public data), if all the cable network start to use NAT, just in sense of domains, we might have IP supply for few more decades.
And it would be very interesting if someone from Ripe NCC can share with us what is the most IP consuming business in the planet.
In which, is that service can use NAT in sometime future?
I talked to an UK telecom provider one day in a ripe lunch, he told me that their network is already partly using NAT(sorry I didn't remember his name, but I am sure he is on this mailing list), and he only need a /21 for entire network.
And another thing was, I heard from one of my friend in the Apanic meeting, that someone is selling entire A class there for 10 USD/ IP.
We don't know if there is already some successful story there regarding IP sales. But seems to me, based on what happened on Asian now, at least in China, as I heard from many of my colleagues there, there was no real shortage there at this time.
No body goes bankrupt because of no IPs left.
So that raise an interesting point, since 60% of the world domain is in fact wasted, is that the same story with IP usage. After all, we allocated almost half of the pool before RIR even exists.
The current way of IP distributing results a very noneffective way of "past business" IP usage as well(e.g. someone changed their business from cable business to an enterprise business, of course that guy will not return Ripe NCC his additional free 2 M IPs).
So when their is a real market for IPv4, and all the latency space come to sale, will we last much much longer than everybody expected?
We our-self have few dozen of enterprise customers, and they are already paying 3-5 USD/ month /IP for years, as asking them to re-program their software and re-provision their business into IPv6, the cost will be enormous for them, and one more thing is, most software writers don't really like IPv6, as it is hard to remember and hard to type(it will be a whole lot easier if you just remember the IP and type it every time you have to do so, rather than copy paste, we all know the reason). So, even IP price eventually raise to 30USD even 50USD, it is still very hard for them to switch it over to IPv6 as long as they don't have IPv6-only client, because they are paying this amount of money for IP per year anyway.
Another thing is, one thing aside from RIR meetings and ISP meetings, we didn't really hear a lot about IPv6. IPv6 come into developer is still something new and interesting, and one guy I talked in the IPv6 workshop in the Ripe64, a software developer for an Austria local company, who don't even know that IPv6 has been around for almost a decades.
Since Ripe is almost finish it's public pools, my last question is, will one day all the wasted IP address being effectively picked up because of existing marketplace, and that market place will last us another 3 decades before we really going to IPv6 ear?
Go Ipv6 Pro Last forever(this reason doesn't really come into play because it this can be a reason convince enterprise customer then it should be done 10 years ago.). unlimited amount of address space.(same as above) cost reasons. con: need new router new config new practice and testing almost every part of the business(from software to hardware). very hard to remember and write. (welcome to add more on this list)
IPv4 pro you know how it works it works for all of our business life. it is easy to remember con cost reasons.
But let's look at how much we are paying Ripe NCC now, for large ones, they are paying more coffee in the office than they are paying Ripe thing. So does that really hurts them when they pay 20USD per IP, look at their margin and their current costs structure, I would say for most business, it should be fine.
If there is enough supply in the market for next decades, and keep the price well below 50 USD per IP, I believe 99% of business would accept this price and go on with their life.
History already tell us most of us don't look too far to the future(otherwise we are already there).
Hope my a bit of 2 cents can get more interesting thoughts come around.
-- -- Kind regards. Lu
This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the text of the transmission received.
---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the
general page:
https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
participants (11)
-
Artem B -
Dariusz Margas -
Dr. Christopher Kunz -
Erik Bais -
Gert Doering -
Job Snijders -
Lu Heng -
Lu Heng -
Rob Golding -
Stefan Neufeind -
William Weber