Last Available IPv4 Blocks Allocated 312
stoborrobots writes "Following on from APNIC's earlier assessment that they would need to request the last available /8 blocks, they have now been allocated 39/8 and 106/8, triggering ARIN's final distribution of blocks to the RIRs. According to the release, 'APNIC expects normal allocations to continue for a further three to six months.'"
Egypt ... (Score:5, Funny)
Egypt has just given up theirs ...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Awww! but they all smell like camel...
Apparently IPv4 blocks are not like Doritos!
Watch out for those Pyramid s(p|c)ams then (Score:5, Funny)
Hi, I'm General Tutan Khamun. As commander of the Royal Camel Battalion, I was in charge of the valuable ancient artifacts of the Arab Republic of Egypt. However because of ongoing chaos in the country, numerous treasures have been lost. For a small fee, you can help me recover these artifacts and return them to their rightful owners. Please send me your contact detail$$$ and I will call you back.
May Pharaoh be with you!
Re: (Score:2)
No, no, it's:
Hi, I'm General Tutan Khamun. As commander of the Royal Camel Battalion, I was in charge of paying the families of military dead in the Arab Republic of Egypt. However because of ongoing chaos in the country, numerous records have lost, and many dead have no recorded heir. Therefore, the payouts to families are large.
We need a person outside Egypt to serve as an intermediary to help transfer funds to heirs in the United States. In exchange for your help, we will pay you the some of TEN MIL
Artifacts (Score:3)
Mrs. Frederic called. She says you were not supposed to divulge any information on Warehouse 2.
IANA's final, not ARIN's final (Score:5, Informative)
triggering ARIN's final distribution of blocks to the RIRs
I think you mean triggering IANA's final distribution. ARIN is one of the 5 RIRs who will receive a final /8 from IANA.
Re: (Score:3)
Comcast user here... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Whether you should be worried depends on what you use your internet connection for.
If you only use it for conventional client stuff you shouldn't worry too much, I would expect important services to remain available on IPV4 for a long time. On the other hand if you do stuff that relies on incoming connections you should be aware that at some point your IPV4 service may be put behind ISP level NAT to free up IPv4 addresses for more important uses (though comcast is in a better position than most on this beca
Re:Comcast user here... (Score:4, Informative)
Meanwhile, if you really want IPv6 for whatever reason, I set up a tunnel with Hurricane Electric. After configuring my computers and router (DD-WRT, IPv6 is fully supported), I had IPv6 both internally and externally (i.e. IPv6 DHCP and access to the IPv6 Internet). You can set your own up here [tunnelbroker.net].
(I took it down shortly afterward, because I don't know about any security ramifications this would have.)
Re: (Score:3)
i.e. IPv6 DHCP
Why did you go with DHCP rather than the simpler, faster and cooler stateless autoconfig with radvd?
I took it down shortly afterward, because I don't know about any security ramifications this would have
None, assuming you set up a firewall to block incoming IPv6 connections.
Re: (Score:2)
If you got 7/10 on IPv4, all is ok. The explanation says it clearly that no problems are expected for you when AAAA records will start being published, as your system will gracefully ignore them.
Even with fully working IPv6 you may get less than the max if your DNS server isn't fully up to scratch, like Google's 8.8.8.8.
Re: (Score:3)
Have you set up to use Comcast's 6to4 or 6rd tunnel service? I am on Comcast with 6rd set up and I get 9/10 (only warning is that Comcast DNS isn't on v6 yet).
Have a look here [comcast6.net] for 6rd instructions. Otherwise, set up 6to4 using 192.88.99.1.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry, you're on Comcast. You have enough problems without worrying about IPv4 vs v6 as it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except for a godawful text display, it works just fine for me on Chromium 9. 10/10, 10/10. Default settings, no extensions other than their fake AdBlock since I don't use Chromium for anything but a rare test, so there must be something amiss in your configuration
Something Something Egypt Something Something (Score:3, Funny)
Remember, I said witty.
Re: (Score:3)
hey, I tried (Score:2)
Well, I did check to see if anybody else had posted that joke, but then I had to log in again to actually post.
What is with this new Slashdot always logging me out? It seems that the cookie has changed or isn't enough to do the job.
I set Firefox to junk all cookies when I close the browser, then whitelisted the Slashdot cookies. This worked nicely for years. I can no longer even find the button to whitelist a cookie; probably a Firefox "upgrade" got rid of it to make the UI "easier" to use...???
Re: (Score:2)
How many IP 4 blocks do you think Egypt does not need anymore? That ought to help us out for awhile.
Sorry, this story must be censored (Score:2)
"final distribution of five /8 blocks"
If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times.
You do NOT talk about the final five!
Re: (Score:2)
I guess bsg has been off the air too long for people to get that reference. :)
which will roll out first? (Score:3)
IPv6 or Duke Nukem Forever?
The race to the consumer roll out is on!
Re: (Score:2)
IPv6 or Duke Nukem Forever?
I've got IPv6 running on my Mac right now. OTOH, I looked on the App Store, and didn't see Duke Nukem Forever available for download. :^(
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Current operating systems support IPv6, but consumer grade routers and a few ISP's havent jumped on the bandwagon yet
All very true, but unlike DNF, the code for IPv6 definitely exists and definitely works. It's just (haha!) a matter of actually installing it in the places it needs to be installed.
Ok...this really sucks! (Score:2)
Why can't we go after legacy space? (Score:2)
I can't undertand why we can't ask legacy holders to give some accounting for their space usage. Take the US Postal Service, for example. Give each of the estimated 43,000 ZIP codes out there its own IP address, and that won't even fill a /16. And yet they have 56/8? Surely they don't need that much. Is there language in these old distributions that prevents the possibility of them being audited and revoked? And even if we don't go after mismanaged /8 space, registries certainly have an obligation to go aft
Re:Why can't we go after legacy space? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Why can't we go after legacy space? (Score:4, Insightful)
We can ask them to do that. In fact some organisations that initially had very large (/8) allocations have already given some of their pool back. However, the growth of the internet is consuming a /8 worth of IPs every 4-6 weeks, at present. So even if all organisations with a /8 gave it back, it'd give us maybe a year's extra time, if that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It's under my desk.
Damn, I just accidentally kicked the power cable out.
240/4 subnets (Score:3)
I note that IANA has classified 240/8 - 255/8 (well 254/8 really - 255 is for broadcasts) as reserved for future use. Is not the future now?
Re:240/4 subnets (Score:5, Insightful)
There is a lot of legacy IPv4 software in networking components will not route packets going to those addresses, since they were designated as future use a long time ago.
Since that software would have to be updated, it might as well just be updated to IPv6.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it a bit idiotic to hard code refusal to route addresses reserved for "future use"?
The firmware developers should have expected the "future" would come eventually right?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Sure, and it was also stupid to only use 32 bits for the address.
A lot of dumb decisions were made in the early days of the internet when they didn't know how far reaching those decisions would turn out to be or the problems they would eventually cause.
Re:240/4 subnets (Score:5, Insightful)
Except they were not stupid and they were not dumb. You look at your megabytes and gigabytes of RAM and think of course that's stupid. But a current era machine would be something like the Apple II with 4 kB - 4096 bytes - of RAM, where it really, really matter if an IP address takes up 4 bytes or 8 bytes. Or if you use 2 or 4 digits to store the year. By the time TCP/IP became official, cutting edge machines like the IBM PC and Spectrum Z80 had 16 kB.
You must remember that TCP/IP was designed only around the time people started to imagine the possibility of a personal computer, and even then it was for the few and rich. That we'd all get together in one big network was even further out, I used to dial BBS for many years before I got on the Internet, even though it already existed as such.
Even today when there's far more people and people are much richer than 30 years ago there's only about 2 billion people on the Internet, even if you assumed a PC for everyone we'd still be good for another while. But I have a PC at home and at work and in my pocket and it all adds up. But who had that crystal ball in the late 70s/early 80s and what if they did?
Sure, you could have just picked some impossibly huge number that'd obviously be enough for everything. But it would have had a huge and immediate impact on memory consumption and cost there and then. We're not talking about short sighted businessmen that only care about the next quarter here. We're talking about things that could only be a problem decades down the road if this becomes a megahit. Sure it's shitty for us, but that's not their fault. Particularly when people have been waving the warning flags for years and everybody's happily ignored it until we hit the brick wall.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it a bit idiotic to hard code refusal to route addresses reserved for "future use"?
The firmware developers should have expected the "future" would come eventually right?
How should developers have designed the use of that address space? Unicast? Multicast? Anycast? Some-as-yet-unknown-cast? Kind of hard to program that in and for what benefit? Zero return really and one might argue for a net loss as some vendors may have designed its use one way and others may have done something altogether different and incompatible with the first. Then what? Not it's totally screwed up. Not to mention if it's not used but enabled for years and years I bet there would be bugs galore since
Re: (Score:2)
Well for one, support would be a nightmare.
With a v6 address, you can gauge connectivity with a simple question, does your software/hardware support IPv6?
With a semi-reachable v4 address, it would be "does your hardware AND any routers or gateway servers in between your box and the intended destination show up on this huge list of incompatible hardware?".
Re: (Score:3)
Support is no harder because you try v6 first.
But it will be. Try explaining to your customers why some people have a fully routable v4 assignment, but yours is hopelessly crippled and will only enjoy spotty connectivity. There isn't enough information about IPv6 in the general marketplace already, there is virtually none about this alternate range of v4 addresses that could potentially work for some people but not others.
Besides, any of those IPv4 bandaid type solutions just delay the impetus to move to IPv6. If you are going to make people check and
Re:240/4 subnets (Score:4, Informative)
Except that a good deal of devices refuse to route anything to such addresses, making them effectively useless. Having to reflash every router (including "consumer" ones) and fix every broken config would be harder than just migrating to IPv6. Strictly speaking, easier to amend but with breakages harder to spot.
Re: (Score:2)
No. Not ever. By definition.
Buy an IPv6 router. Or a time machine. Or an IPv6 time machine.
Re: (Score:2)
You run MS windows right ?
You will not connect to anything in the 240.0 to 255.0 address range, windows will error. Windows isn't the only one.
Plus at the current burn rate 16 /8s will last just seven months...
Some of the mobile operators are getting close to the stage where they need an entire IPv4 internet just for their devices and there are already more devices connected to the internet than there are addresses.
Re: (Score:2)
Uhhh... we dont use Class C or any "Class" blocks at all anymore. Try /24 or some other equivalent notation.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually class C networks are very common indeed, probably because it's such a handy size. But you're as so far as the term shouldn't be used. Call it /24 instead. CIDR (Classless Inter-Domain Routing) is the new way.
The original poster probably confuses the 'standard' of using a.b.c.255 as the broadcast address in the old class C networks with 255/8, maybe because the subnet mask usually is 255..
No, 255 is not a magic number, except it's 11111111 in binary and thus the largest possible 8-bit number. As the
So when is Randall Munroe.. (Score:2)
Going to update http://xkcd.com/195/ [xkcd.com] ?
Re: (Score:2)
He won't, it won't look original any more.
But you can do it. Here's the source data [iana.org].
An IPv4 address enters a bar and says... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
A good laugh... :)
Mod parent up, please!
10 years ago, this would already be up thru the clouds. What's happened?!
I just talked to my ISP about this... (Score:2)
I was floored. "Until"??? That's like not bothering to buy toilet paper until you need to use the restroom *after* you've already run out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was floored. "Until"??? That's like not bothering to buy toilet paper until you need to use the restroom *after* you've already run out.
That's probably reasonable. There are a number of ways to address IPv4/6 interoperability.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's about on-par with my experiences.
Previous ISP (TeliaSonera) told me that they gave out IPv6 blocks for free to business customers but refused to do so for residental customers except for their "tester" customers (and they didn't want more of those).
Switched to Bahnhof a while back and as great as they are they can't offer native IPv6 access where I live because the open citynet I get their connection through (city owns the last mile and the ISPs hook into the city's network for a small fee per subscr
Re: (Score:3)
no one answering the phone at an isp knows what their internal plans are.
Google to the rescue... (Score:2)
If anyone from google is reading this please consider preferencing sites with A and AAAA records in your search results or heck just threaten/rumor to do it.
This IS the end of IPv4 addresses (Score:2)
Just to put the rates into perspective ...
APNIC -- Asia Pacific region, have just been allocated 2 more /8's, once the final distribution is done they will have just under 6 free /8's allocated to them. This is expected to last until September ... THIS Year.
The current 'burn rate' of /8 for the world is about one every two weeks. Whatever happens IPv4 is running out of addresses RIGHT NOW and it will mean that ISPs will be running out before the end of 2012, some of them by the end of this year.
The M
Seems an appropriate time... (Score:3)
Re:So the question is... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
You can hope. In reality, consumer ISPs will probably start using NAT since they gain little from customers doing anything that requires a public IP.
The majority of customers won't notice and the rest will suffer crippled services or be asked to pay a surcharge for a non NAT IP address. That has the potential to raise revenue for ISPs rather than implementing IPv6 which would incur expenditure.
Get a tunnel. (Score:4)
Hurricane Electric [tunnelbroker.net]
And others.
Re: (Score:2)
I've looked at those a few times. I'm actually a member of ... umm ... both, maybe? It's been a while since I looked at it.
I wanted to set up the tunnel for my web servers, so I could make my sites IPv6. I started out with the tunnel on my desktop first. This was only maybe a year ago. It was fun and games. I was all happy having my IPv6 block. I could go to all the IPv6 sites. All dozen or so of them. Hrm. Then the service was going bad. At best, I had maybe 6 hour
Re: (Score:2)
We will see widespread NAT usage. And it won't destroy the Internet. It'll muck up your bittorrent traffic to some degree. Just about everyone works behind a NAT anyways. I've mucked about with some implementations that had 3 levels of NAT, and those worked fine. The only thing that didn't work was being able to directly access machines behind so many levels. Every modern protocol works.
Exactly. As long as you're a content consumer. The internet becomes another cable TV channel for the masses. Good luck if you want to be a content provider - better go make a facebook page or upload to youtube.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Usually.
multi level NAT will brake alot of stuff! (Score:2)
multi level NAT will brake alot of stuff!
Re: (Score:2)
multi level NAT will brake alot of stuff!
Consumer ISPs will just charge you an extra 2.99 per device to have a true router (behind their nat) so they can sell 8000 people 192.168.0.2, etc, etc.
Re:So the question is... (Score:5, Informative)
Y2K was perfectly legitimate. It was only through heroic efforts that programmers were able to overcome years of managerial negligence and get the changes made in a knick of time. As is typical, since the herculean effort caused nothing to happen the world yawned and assumed the geeks were just moaning over nothing all along.
In this case, it's not a flag day where what worked a second ago no longer does. It's more along the line of pain slowly creeping up on you day by day until one day you realize it's actually excruciating.
It's been building for a few years, but few have seen the pain. In the '90s when you wanted a class C allocation, just ask and it was yours. Since then, the standards for justification have gotten tighter and tighter until you almost have to either exaggerate of consult a fortune teller to fill them out appropriately.
It WILL get worse, and it will ramp up quickly, but it won't be like Y2K might have been.
On a side note, a Y2K related issue (leap day implementing the 4 year and 100 year rule but not the 400 year rule) did result in a significant nuclear event at a Japanese fuel reprocessing facility.
Re:So the question is... (Score:4, Insightful)
Y2K was perfectly legitimate. It was only through heroic efforts that programmers were able to overcome years of managerial negligence and get the changes made in a knick of time.
When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all. -- God, (Futurama, 2002)
Re: (Score:2)
Y2K was perfectly legitimate. It was only through heroic efforts that programmers were able to overcome years of managerial negligence and get the changes made in a knick of time. As is typical, since the herculean effort caused nothing to happen the world yawned and assumed the geeks were just moaning over nothing all along.
I'm sure that for many systems that was true. But to be honest, it passed with such a complete yawn that not only were all the important systems fixed, it seems all the "nice to have" systems were fixed as well. I don't think it's any exaggeration to say that many people and companies used y2k as a tool to sell companies services they didn't need or at rates that were far too high.
When you finally got the ball rolling so many IT companies had a direct profit motive in continuing the scare propaganda that it
Re:So the question is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Some of it was overrated but some of it actually helped by kicking the people who needed to open their wallets. Y2K consulting was painfully expensive because it was all done at the last minute when everyone who knew what they were doing was busy. Had the same companies started even a few years earlier they would most likely have been able to get the same service at half the price.
IPv6 is the same stupidity all over again. A few years back I worked for an isp and asked if I could try some test IPv6 deployments but was refused because no one could see a need for it in the next quarter. I don't even want to know how much work it will take them to set it up now that it is an emergency.
where are IPV6 routers and modems?? (Score:3)
where are IPV6 routers and modems??
Where are the router firmware updates with IPV6? What about all the Cable and DSL modems? What about cable boxes? they get IP's and run on the cable network.
Re:where are IPV6 routers and modems?? (Score:4, Informative)
Some consumer routers have already supported it for some time: e.g. the Apple Airport Express, some NetComm routers, Fritz!Box (popular in Europe, mostly). For the rest, the firmware will be forthcoming, no doubt. My DSL modem/router manufacturer (Billion, http://www.billion.com/ [billion.com]) has already released firmware updates to some models to enable native dual stack. My particular model is due to be updated 'Q1 2011', so within the next two months. Which is great as my ISP already has native IPv6 available to its end customers now and a fully IPv6 backbone, so it should be a seamless transition.
Having said that there are slack router manufacturers and crappy ISPs that have sat on their hands for too long and will now have to madly scramble. (Or implement carrier grade NAT which is an ugly kludge - I would immediately leave any such ISP that implemented it).
There is one small problem however: some cheap/old routers don't physically have the onboard memory to fit a firmware containing both an IPv4 and IPv6 stack. So there will definitely be some users that need to physically replace their hardware, unfortunately.
Re: (Score:2)
What about a simple IPv6 router that works just like our IPv4 home gateway NAT routers today?
I mean, so far playing with IPv6, to have an all-IPv6 network, each PC gets 3 IPv6 addresses. They get a link-local address (which stays on the local network and won't cross a router). Then if I want to enter their IP addresses, I really should use something in the FC00::/64 range (which makes for easy typing), to avoid having to type in the cryptic strings instead. Finally, to get on the 'net, they have a random /6
Re:where are IPV6 routers and modems?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Uh, IPv6 autoconfiguration?
And who renumbers? No one should be typing in IPs anywhere anymore. DHCPv6 and DNS and now you're done.
Try DD-WRT (Score:5, Interesting)
Everywhere. Pretty much all good routers are IPv6 capable, just not out of the box (unfortunately). You have to do things like put the DD-WRT open source firmware on them. On the plus side though, if you do that you don't just get IPv6, you additionally pretty much turn your home router into an enterprise router.
Note that some companies like Buffalo are starting to ship their routers with DD-WRT on them by default, so we are starting to see IPv6 enabled routers out of the box. As for the other companies, they are probably holding off in the hopes that people are forced to buy more routers from them in the future, rather than running what they currently have. Once the public becomes aware that IPv6 is a desirable feature, then they will start selling them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure you can still mine vespene gas after it's depleted, just has lower yields.
Re:Who Cares? (Score:5, Informative)
How would I do that with you sitting in that backwater swamp of IPv4 with your fingers jammed in your ears prattling on about how you don't believe in that newfangled IPv6 thing and that it's probably the work of the devil?
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. It's just a stupid number. How did we ever manage to get ourselves into a position where we could run out of numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
To answer that seriously: it's because high-speed routing is done by ASICs (custom-designed chips) that can't easily cope with an extensible/dynamic system. You could have something similar to the Unicode system where you can have an infinite-sized address, but you can't process that in one clock cycle of a backbone router, so we have to compromise and set a very large but static size for the address. Several decades ago it was significantly more expensive to build a router that routed IPv6-sized addresses,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Try to get yourself a /24 and you'll see that there IS an effect. It used to be that if you asked for a /24 you got it with no further questions. The way it is now, I'm expecting them to start requiring the results of your last colonoscopy and your astrological chart.
The first effects of people being on dual stack will be to cap how expensive v4 addresses might get. If enough people are dual stack, there's not much chance to price gouge as they run out.
Besides that, you can't see the dancing kame [kame.net] on v4 :-)
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe we can recycle Egypt's, they don't seem to want them...
Too bad nobody actually has the guts to do that. Take everything allocated to Egypt and give it to someone else. If they complain, just say "You shut down the Internet in your country, you obviously didn't want them anymore."
Re: (Score:3)
Take everything allocated to Egypt and give it to someone else. If they complain, just say "You shut down the Internet in your country, you obviously didn't want them anymore."
So you would take away the Egyptian peoples' IPv4 access forever, because their tyrannical ruler engaged in Internet censorship?
I'm not sure I see the logic behind that.
Re: (Score:3)
Wouldn't it be better to do it anyways? AfriNIC could give them IPv6 addresses, and Egypt could get back online when they are ready.
Re: (Score:2)
Brilliant idea! - Use'em or lose'em!
Re: (Score:2)
That will give us an extra 4-6 weeks, at current rates of IPv4 growth. So handy, but by no means life-saving.
Re: (Score:2)
So what?
That gives you two weeks and the current world burn rate. Just barely enough time for a committee to decide to scratch their collective asses.
What will probably happen to that block is that it'll stay in ARIN's pool and be reallocated to America/Canada. For just America I understand it might give you a month and a half or so.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
5 more times as the RIRs run out.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you either installed any of the various IPv6 tunneling methods, then tested the most important websites for you, and found that they all support native IPv6?
Or, if you answered no to any of the above, have you started investing so you can afford to pay for IPv4 access? Because I'm not going to pay for you.
Re:O M G (Score:5, Informative)
If you read the headlines carefully, you'd have noticed a pattern:
2001: IPv4 address space will run out in ten years. ...
2002: IPv4 address space will run out in nine years.
2010: IPv4 address space will run out next year.
2011: Last Available IPv4 Blocks Assigned. IPv4 address space will run out later this year.
Re: (Score:2)
It'll be interesting to see how companies sitting on piles of v4's react when their hoarded addresses start looking very attractive on the black market.
Re: (Score:3)
There are no more unallocated blocks. That's the point.
Re: (Score:2)
That gets brought up every time.
A: Reclaiming those address spaces will be difficult. It would take extensive internal auditing and network reorganization to free up those address spaces.
B: At current rates, it would only buy us an extra month or two.