039/8 APNIC 2011-01 whois.apnic.net ALLOCATED
106/8 APNIC 2011-01 whois.apnic.net ALLOCATED
... whimper ...
039/8 APNIC 2011-01 whois.apnic.net ALLOCATED
106/8 APNIC 2011-01 whois.apnic.net ALLOCATED
it's been on most of the lists. sunny will probably post to nanog
shortly. the announcement is really well phrased, but i will not steal
sunny's thunder.
randy
Almost a sigh, actually; though in a moment of horrid thread convergence
and poor taste, there was some question being tossed around as to whether
Egypt's space could be reused, if they're not going to use it after all... 
Matt
That was it 
so long IPv4! It's been a great ride!
As good old Frank said, "And now, the end is near, we face the final curtain..."
cheers!
Carlos
I thought there are still 5 /8's left in IANA.
I seem to recall there is an automatic endgame for those...?
I thought there was an agreement that when there was only 5 /8's, each RIR would be allocated 1 /8, and IANA would be done.
Jack
One each of the remaining /8′s will be allocated to each RIR. Once the RIR’s are out of space in their current supply and they only have this 1 /8 left, it will trigger policies relating to how that /8 will be allocated.
...Skeeve
The last 5 are, by existing agreement, to be allocated 1 per Regional
registry immediately after the other /8s are exhausted. This was
agreed to some time ago to ensure that no regional was disadvantaged
by timing concerns on applications for space as the IANA exhaustion
approached.
As that has now happened, all that awaits is for the announcement of
which RIR got which remaining /8. "Immediate" doesn't mean today this
instant, but by agreement, they're effectively all gone right now.
The large woman has walked on stage and is awaiting the orchestra
director's starting the music.
-george
Almost a sigh, actually; though in a moment of horrid thread convergence
and poor taste, there was some question being tossed around as to whether
Egypt's space could be reused, if they're not going to use it after all...
That's sounds like those bad jokes that some jerks tell at a funeral.
-J
It's more than just an agreement--it's part of the documented
IANA global policy:
http://www.icann.org/en/general/allocation-remaining-ipv4-space.htm
We're now faction section 2 action.
Matt
They are effectively gone, will be allocated in coming days or weeks, 1
per RIR. This is per global IANA policy.
regards
Carlos
That was it
IPv4's not dead yet; even the first RIR exhaustion probable in 3 -
6 months doesn't end the IPv4 ride.
There is some hope more IPv4 organizations will start thinking about
their plans for establishing connectivity with IPv6; so they can
commmunicate with IPv6-only hosts that will begin to emerge
later.
Until the core networks fix their peering relationships, I don't think it matters. My connectivity to google still sucks. Nothing else matters.
Jack
It may not be dead, but, it's is chain stoking.
Owen
What organizations (eye networks) will do is layer NAT till the cows come
home for some years to come. Buckle up!
-Jack Carrozzo
All of the eye networks that have looked at this have realized the following
things that you apparently have not:
1. Layering NAT beyond 2 deep (one provider, one subscriber)
doesn't help.
2. NAT444 will break lots of things that work in current NAT44.
3. Users subjected to this environment after experiencing the
limited brokenness of NAT44 or full access to the internet
will not be happy.
4. Maintaining NAT444 environments will be a support headache
and a costly arms race of deployments and management.
5. IPv6 will cost a lot less than NAT444 as soon as they can
get their subscribers fully deployed and is a much more
desirable alternative.
Owen
Has there been any discussion about allocating the Class E blocks? If this
doesn't count as "future use" what does? (Yes, I realize this doesn't *fix*
the problem here)
-Jeremy
I think it has been discussed at various levels, but would likely have been dismissed for one or more of the following reasons:
1. A lot of people filter packets and/or prefixes 224/3 or 240/4 out of habit, right, wrong, or otherwise, so space from 240/4 is likely to have lots of reachability problems.
2. The effort expended by people to solve reachability problems from space they'd get out of 240/4 would be better put toward moving to v6.
3. Busting out 16 more /8s only delays the IPv4 endgame by about a year.
jms
Discussed, Disgusted, and Dismissed.
The E space would take more software upgrades to existing systems than just
deploying IPv6.
Owen