Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×
Network Networking The Internet

MIT No Longer Owns 18.0.0.0/8 (ttias.be) 130

An anonymous reader shares: MIT no longer owns 18.0.0.0/8. That's a very big block of scarce IPv4 addresses that have become available again. One block inside this /8, more specifically 18.145.0.0/16, was transferred to Amazon.

MIT No Longer Owns 18.0.0.0/8

Comments Filter:
  • RTFA (Score:5, Funny)

    by El_Muerte_TDS ( 592157 ) on Thursday April 20, 2017 @11:02AM (#54269813) Homepage

    I did it! I read the whole article. And so did everybody who read the summary.

    • Was it as exciting as the summary? How many IP's in terms of number of Library of Congresses was it?
      • Why the hell does MIT need ANY funds from Amazon or anyone else, to switch to IPv6??? Their endowment (what we know of publically) is over $13B USD!!! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] I really vomit when this happens.
        • Where did you get the idea that money changed hands?
          • Re:RTFA (Score:5, Interesting)

            by tempest69 ( 572798 ) on Thursday April 20, 2017 @11:27AM (#54270037) Journal
            Because IPv4 addresses are valuable ($10 range currently) Having 16.7 Million of them is a nice chunk of change, letting 65K of them go for free seems to be a breach of fiduciary responsibility by someone.
            • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

              by Aighearach ( 97333 )

              Possession of an IP address does not create a "fiduciary responsibility."

              You seen to have fell off a meme wagon.

              • by Pax681 ( 1002592 )

                Possession of an IP address does not create a "fiduciary responsibility."

                You seen to have fell off a meme wagon.

                You SEEM to have FALLEN off a meme wagon .. FTFY
                you seem to have fallen off the grammar wagon :P

                • Surely you mean "a" grammar wagon, as excepting situations of internal conflict grammar is merely a matter of style in English.

                  • by Pax681 ( 1002592 )

                    Surely you mean "a" grammar wagon, as excepting situations of internal conflict grammar is merely a matter of style in English.

                    Nope, it's one big , singular fucking wagon and you ain't on it!
                    there's right way and a wrong way and you got it very fucking wrong.

                    internal conflict

                    Examples

                    noun
                    1.
                    psychological struggle within the mind of a literary or dramatic character, the resolution of which creates the plot's suspense:
                    Hamlet's inaction is caused by internal conflict.
                    2.
                    mental struggle arising from opposing demands or impulses.

                    So tell me Captain Bollocks... in which manner were you using literary device of "internal confl

                    • If you couldn't parse it, you didn't get to play. Not my problem.

                      If I was French, I might want to get onto some singular grammar wagon, but since I use English I won't go anywhere near that shit. Like my friend said after getting an English degree: The first three years they teach you rules. The last year they teach that those are fake rules to help you practice, and actually it all a matter of style.

                      People who claim there is only one style, or that it is in poor style to use a construct that they cannot co

                    • Wow! Please stop trying to legitimise your silly, basic spelling and grammar error and try to pass it off and something other folks are 'too dumb to get' , you are just digging a hole deeper and deeper. :-)
                    • OK smartypants, if you think it is an "error," what is the authority on English grammar? Is there a book or something that lists the rules?

                      You're hilariously fucking stupid. You can't even comprehend the nature of language, or the meaning of the word "grammar," or the meaning of "error." And yet you argue and dig and dig, even telling me that I'm digging, and yet, I do know the nature of language, I do know the source of authority for grammar, and if there is only one or a choice between several. (spoiler:

                    • LOL you REALLY bite don't you... As for a book on English grammar.. There are many books to help you with grammar and spelling. Try not to get so worked up you cry or something! MWAH!
                    • by Pax681 ( 1002592 )
                      Answer number 2 (now that i am home again!....

                      OK smartypants, if you think it is an "error," what is the authority on English grammar? Is there a book or something that lists the rules?

                      maybe these will do the trick.. they are good enough for universities. [theguardian.com]
                      or these should suffice [amazon.com]
                      you SEEM to think that "seen" is a perfectly fine and esoteric substitute for "seem"... it's not.
                      You also seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that you are right under all circumstances even when blatantly wrong.
                      I als

            • Re:RTFA (Score:4, Informative)

              by Carewolf ( 581105 ) on Thursday April 20, 2017 @02:41PM (#54271599) Homepage

              Because IPv4 addresses are valuable ($10 range currently) Having 16.7 Million of them is a nice chunk of change, letting 65K of them go for free seems to be a breach of fiduciary responsibility by someone.

              They are not resellable like that, what they have is not property just a reserved allocation, and one that can be revoked if they start treating it as resellable property.

              • Yeah, that's what ARIN says, but I've seen several companies sell off their IPv4 space to other companies, and ARIN doesn't revoke the transfer.

              • Re:RTFA (Score:4, Informative)

                by petermgreen ( 876956 ) <[plugwash] [at] [p10link.net]> on Thursday April 20, 2017 @05:13PM (#54272509) Homepage

                The legal status of legacy allocations has never been especially clear. They were allocated before the RIRs even existed and long before anyone thought IP addreses would have any value.

                In any case after arguing about it for years most of the major RIRs (ARIN, RIPE and APNIC) have allowed sale of IP addresses subject to some conditions. They have concluded that making IPv4 addresses a marketable commodity is the least-bad way to manage the post-exhaustion era.

                I guess that MIT probablly cut a deal with ARIN allowing them to carve up the block into smaller sub-blocks (allowing them to sell the unused sub-blocks while keeping the used ones) in exchange for agreeing to ARIN taking a role in the address space's management.

            • They didn't buy them in the first place. They paid basically a processing fee. If you can't show why and how you will use them, you have to give them back. At least that was the case for a /24 a previous employer had for a wireless ISP business.
          • by kwoff ( 516741 )
            They announced it [github.com]. Will use the money to upgrade their systems etc. Selling off 8 million IP addresses. I think that's worth around $100 million.
          • This did: https://gist.github.com/simons... [github.com] They got paid.
            • "As part of our upgrade to IPv6, we will be consolidating our in-use IPv4 address space to facilitate the sale of MIT’s excess IPv4 capacity. Net proceeds from the sale will cover our network upgrade costs, and the remainder will provide a source of endowed funding for the Institute to use in furthering its academic and research mission." from https://gist.github.com/simons... [github.com]

              *vomitting sound*

        • Endowments come with many strings attached. Just because they have $13B USD doesn't mean they are allowed to spend it anyway they like. Most of the funds are earmarked for specific purposes. Additionally it must be invested to ensure future returns.

          It's not like they could just cut a check for $13B...

    • Re:RTFMA (Score:5, Informative)

      by Zocalo ( 252965 ) on Thursday April 20, 2017 @11:28AM (#54270039) Homepage
      Needs an "M" in there for "misleading". MIT hasn't released the entire /8 back to ARIN; AFAICT from whois queries they've transfered a whole bunch of /16s (20+) directly over to Amazon, all of which are above the 18.145.0.0 line. Given the highly non-contiguous allocations across the upper half of the /8 range the most likely cause is that they've received chunk of cash for giving Amazon all the /16s that they were not currently actively using.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Here's the changelog from the ARIN list if anyone's interested:
        http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-issued/2017-April/003050.html

    • Dammit! I was saving the article for later!

      Shouldn't you have put a "spoilers" warning in your subject line?

    • Well thanks for pointing that out. Now I feel ill and like I don't belong on Slashdot anymore.
  • Trade. (Score:5, Funny)

    by msauve ( 701917 ) on Thursday April 20, 2017 @11:21AM (#54269967)
    Someone traded 10.0.0.0/8 for it. MIT got a deal, because like /. UIDs, lower numbered ones are better!
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Internet Society: "Folks in the developing world can't get IP addresses for their servers and gateway routers and you guys are just sitting on yours. Now c'mon!"

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Internet Society: "Folks in the developing world can't get food and water and you guys are just sitting on yours. Now c'mon!"

      FTFY.

  • In the same regard, Xerox no longer owns all of 13.0.0.0/8 either. Amazon has a piece of that pie, too.

    https://whois.arin.net/rest/or... [arin.net]
  • MIT claimed all of 18.x.x.x early on and just held onto them. When I was there in 2007, I believe they let my frat have full control of all of 18.236.x.x, no subnets required, for 40 guys.

    For those interested, Wikipedia has an amusing list of original A level IP assignments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
    • by EvilSS ( 557649 )
      Most universities have way more IP's than they need. Gone are the days of every device getting a public IP. Heck even at their peak most schools didn't come close to use their allocations. But many of them refuse to give them up for reuse to this day. Companies too. Hell the tiny consulting company I started out at had two class C's (one for them, one for their sister company). There were like 15 of us between both companies! When they got them there were maybe 5 people across both companies. Sadly those s
      • by hjf ( 703092 )

        A nationwide ISP here in Argentina, back in 2004, was assigning a whole /24 when you got their "gold" service. It was 1mbit, guaranteed, all business crap, and came with a /24.
        One day one of our servers stopped responding to the internet. Without any warning, they cut off the /24 to a more sensible /29... and my server was in .200/24.
        I had to give instructions to a field tech there to change the IP to .2 to get access back...

        • by EvilSS ( 557649 )
          Our ISP used to just forget about us. We could count on our internet going down about twice a year and it was always the same thing: They updated their routing tables and forgot about our subnets. Honestly more trouble than it was worth but my boss was so damn proud of those subnets!
      • by Strider- ( 39683 )

        Well, I'm going to be a pit pedantic, and remind you that a /24 necessarily a class C. After the arrival of CIDR, and the end of classfull networking, we've moved to a better solution.

        That said, there is a very valid reason why a small organization might have an entire /24 even if they only have a few people. If you want to be truly multi-homed, with multiple connections to the Internet, announced via BGP, the smallest allocation you can advertise is a /24. It's better than in the old days, when most of the

        • by EvilSS ( 557649 )
          We used a grand total of about 10 IP's at any one time. We were not multi-homed to the internet. Ever. We had no legit use for 512 addresses (yes, we had two FULL class C allocations). At the time they got them, all you had to do was basically ask for them. Back in the day they were handing them out like they would never run out. These were also not IPs allocated to our ISP, they were directly allocated to our companies.
      • If you're only thinking of the number of employees in a business for machine used addressing, you're doing it wrong.
  • by rickb928 ( 945187 ) on Thursday April 20, 2017 @11:49AM (#54270227) Homepage Journal

    Ford still seems to own 19...

    Halliburton, Eli Lilly, U Michigan, Prudential, Merck are some of the more notable assignees.

    Some of these must be subnetted and farmed out, but IPv4 is destined for obscurity, so why bother?

    Still, reading RFCs and seeing Jon Postel's name makes me want to tear up. Miss him.

  • For the last 25 years or so I've been using "traceroute -n 18.0.0.1" as a quick and dirty way to see what the route "outside" looks like (because that assignment was one of the most "permanent" features of the Internet). It's a right move, to be sure - there is absolutely no reason MIT should control that many addresses. Just a small piece of nostalgia. Still can traceroute though ;)

  • by Neuracnu Coyote ( 11764 ) on Thursday April 20, 2017 @11:52AM (#54270249) Homepage Journal

    https://gist.github.com/simons... [github.com]

    "Fourteen million of these IPv4 addresses have not been used, and we have concluded that at least eight million are excess and can be sold without impacting our current or future needs, up to the point when IPv6 becomes universal and address scarcity is no longer an issue. The Institute holds a block of 20 times 10^30 (20 nonillion) IPv6 addresses.

    "As part of our upgrade to IPv6, we will be consolidating our in-use IPv4 address space to facilitate the sale of MIT’s excess IPv4 capacity. Net proceeds from the sale will cover our network upgrade costs, and the remainder will provide a source of endowed funding for the Institute to use in furthering its academic and research mission.

  • by lophophore ( 4087 ) on Thursday April 20, 2017 @11:56AM (#54270287) Homepage

    There is a lot of expensive real-estate tied up in these "8-blocks"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

    HP, by virtue of their acquisition of the assets of DEC, has 2 8-blocks, which is probably worth a small fortune in real money. 33 million IP4 addresses.

    Most (all?) of these were reserved in the great IP address land grab back in the early 90s.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Most (all?) of these were reserved in the great IP address land grab back in the early 90s.

      Kids... Sheesh... Try late 70's...

      https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc790

      Now get off my lawn...

    • HP, by virtue of their acquisition of the assets of DEC, has 2 8-blocks, which is probably worth a small fortune in real money.

      It's a big fortune, the average price per address has exceeded $10 for awhile now. /24s routinely sell for $4-5K these days, /19s for around $100K. HP's space is worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

      • IPs are only worth that much because they're extremely scarce right now. If HP tried to unload all their address space at once they probably wouldn't get all that much for it.

        It's kind of like big executives who are worth a billion or more because of their stock holdings, but if they tried to sell it all the price would tank because of basic supply and demand.

        • by Anonymous Coward

          That is incorrect. The price of IPv4 addresses is capped by alternative ways of solving the problems that IPv4 addresses solve, not by lack of demand. You would have no trouble at all unloading an entire /8. The market would soak it up and ask for more. If you want to make IPv4 addresses worthless, you need to make them useless. Hoarding them is a good way to do that, because that spurs the transition to IPv6. Once there are significant chunks of the internet that IPv4 users cannot interact with, the price

      • To put that in perspective HPs market cap is about 30 Billion dollars.

  • Apple needs to shed a few, as well. They own 17.0.0.0/8

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Good. Very few organizations actually need a /8.
    The US military has several. No point. Free them up!

  • I know they are important and they protect the "world" but if they could release a couple of them that would lower the cost of everyone that need to have a server. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
  • Ice worked in the it dept at two separate universities in the past that have given out public IP addresses to all of their wired computers. I guess when ip's were plentiful (ipv4) and security wasn't all that big, that was OK. These days though, everyone is firewalling up, and handing out internal addresses it makes no sense to continue paying for all that ip range.
  • We just have a bunch of hoarders.

  • Sweet! (Score:5, Funny)

    by sootman ( 158191 ) on Thursday April 20, 2017 @02:44PM (#54271617) Homepage Journal

    I have, like, TONS of 192.168.x.x addresses and I only use a few. How can I sell the rest?

  • ... 127.0.0.1 when you pry it out of my cold, dead fingers!

    • by Anonymous Coward

      I had to loopback around, and re-read this comment.

1 1 was a race-horse, 2 2 was 1 2. When 1 1 1 1 race, 2 2 1 1 2.

Working...