We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are
wondering what the best options are out there?
Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to be plum
out... Any recommendations?
Thanks!
We got ours from logicweb, but all the IPs originated from AfriNIC and were
blacklisted in several different places.
Have you considered IPv6?
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because
you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU.
In article <CAAQxoQELWiE8ywF2hJF8AiM+6JJVxOpHV1-Ef19tcMOCc2E=mg@mail.gmail.com> you write:
We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and are
wondering what the best options are out there?
It's been a long time since I've seen IP space for lease that wasn't
either a scam or totally poisoned.
If it were actually usable, it'd be for sale, not for lease.
R's,
John
is it possible that the OP means: "sale" which I think in arin region still
really means: "Transfer" ?
otherwise, I'd think: "get a link to an ISP, put forth the justification
for a /22 and ... rock on"
Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6? Because
you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with HULU.
Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that
dont use ipv6 these days.
Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands just
on Cloudflare where v6 is default on)
About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb /
netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary.
Not hard to do in the US where most access networks still aren't
supporting IPv6.
Not hard to do in the US where most access networks still aren't
supporting IPv6.
I hear ya, some places are behind.
Check this out, close to 80% of mobile subs are on ipv6 across the 4 major
carriers
http://www.worldipv6launch.org/new-years-resolution-deploy-ipv6/
It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.).
It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are
using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to fixing
their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.).
hulu is on akamai
akamai does provide ipv6 frontends (in fact they do v6 on the front and v4
out the back) so... it really should be pretty easy at this point for hulu
to move traffic to ipv6.
IPv6 still solves your problem if you add any of NAT64, DS-Lite, 464xlat,
MAP-T, MAP-E.
Yes, you’re NATing, but only the traffic to places like Hulu, and it will
decrease over time. And while you need addresses for the outside of the
translator, you don’t need as many (or to get more as frequently).
Lee
On 1/20/18, 10:20 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett"
Add to that CGN from RFC 6598 addresses (100.64/10) + IPv6 though that
reaches its limit at ~4M customers.
Native IPv4 with a GUA to customers is essentially unavailable for new
ISPs. It’s a matter of picking which flavour of NAT you and your
customers are going to use. The sooner ALL ISP’s provide IPv6 to their
customers the sooner we restore delivering the Internet to the customers.
Mark
Customers on ps4s and xboxes will hate you. They will always get "strict"
nat, and it's your fault not mega corporation X's fault for not releasing
IPv4s
Customers on ps4s and xboxes will hate you. They will always get "strict"
nat, and it's your fault not mega corporation X's fault for not releasing
IPv4s
I think you misspelled "those console platforms' fault for being
bad network citizens":
"(10/13/17) As of PS4 update 5.00 no offical IPv6 support has been added."
Xbox one actually seems to DTRT:
https://support.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/networking/ipv6-on-xbox-one
Cheers!
Joe
Customers on ps4s and xboxes will hate you. They will always get "strict" nat,
and it's your fault not mega corporation X's fault for not releasing IPv4s
Maybe. You don’t have to configure strict NAT on your translator (DS-Lite’s
pretty good at this, and although I’m a few weeks away from testing consoles
through 464xlat and MAP, they should work, too). And their NAT workarounds
are pretty sophisticated now.
There comes a point when winning your customers’ love isn’t profitable. I
don’t know if that point is $16/address for you, or $30, or $40, or $90.
Maybe it varies, depending on the customer.
That’s why I suggested in “TCO of CGN”[1] that everyone figure out for
themselves how much money you might lose to unhappy customers via CGN, and
compare it to how much addresses cost, and at what price point you might
turn around and sell addresses. My findings then, based on assumptions that
almost certainly are not true for any particular network, and which may have
changed, suggest that buying addresses still makes sense.
Lee
[1] http://ipv6.nanog.org/meetings/abstract?id=2025
Add to that CGN from RFC 6598 addresses (100.64/10) + IPv6 though that
reaches its limit at ~4M customers.Native IPv4 with a GUA to customers is essentially unavailable for new
ISPs. It’s a matter of picking which flavour of NAT you and your
customers are going to use. The sooner ALL ISP’s provide IPv6 to their
customers the sooner we restore delivering the Internet to the customers.Mark
>
> IPv6 still solves your problem if you add any of NAT64, DS-Lite, 464xlat,
> MAP-T, MAP-E.
>
> Yes, you’re NATing, but only the traffic to places like Hulu, and it will
> decrease over time. And while you need addresses for the outside of the
> translator, you don’t need as many (or to get more as frequently).
>
> Lee
>
> On 1/20/18, 10:20 AM, "NANOG on behalf of Mike Hammett"
>>> It's not really scraping the bottom of the barrel if your customers are
>> using Hulu and they're complaining because Hulu isn't responsive to
>> fixing their problems (geo-location, v6, etc.).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Mike Hammett
>> Intelligent Computing Solutions
>> http://www.ics-il.com
>>
>> Midwest-IX
>> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>>
>>
>> From: "Ca By" <cb.list6@gmail.com>
>> To: "Michael Crapse" <michael@wi-fiber.io>
>> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org>
>> Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 9:54:23 PM
>> Subject: Re: Leasing /22
>>
>>>>> Has Hulu, or a thousand other content distributors considered IPv6?
>>> Because
>>> you can't even tunnel to ipv4 without setting off VPN alarms with
HULU.
>>>>>
>> Hulu? Really scraping the bottom of the barrel of content providers that
>> dont use ipv6 these days.
>>
>> Netflix and Youtube support v6 ... and thousand of others (thousands
just
>> on Cloudflare where v6 is default on)
>>
>> About 80% of my traffic is native e2e v6, mostly google / youtube / fb /
>> netflix / apple / amazon — but your mix may vary.
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> We're on the hunt yet again for an additional /22 to lease, and
are
>>>>> wondering what the best options are out there?
>>>>>
>>>>> Our usual suspects that we've reached out to in the past seem to
be
The biggest problems that start to run with cases of CGN or any other v4
aggregation method are services that still continue to treat single IP
addresses as a single entity (a certain event ticket vendor comes to mind).
Until these organizations either start opening a line of communications
with ISPs, changing their methodology when handling traffic from v4
addresses, and/or deploying v6, the song and dance for v4 addressing will
continue.
The funnest part is telling DMCA/RIAA that an IP address means nothing, not
without a port and exact time, someitmes down to a 10 minute mark. CGNAT +
NAT64/464 xlat using the fewest ipv4s as possible(as suggested) also
requires a large database to retain all records of every port and ipv4
address connected with every new connection.
Which is where MAP-T and MAP-E help as they reduce the amount of logging required.