5 ms·

IPv4 Address Report

27 points by akg_67 12y ago

0x006A 12y ago
anyone knows of an up to date list of providers that offer ipv6 to end users?
- diwo 12y ago
  See http://ipv6-test.com/stats/ http://ipv6-test.com/stats/. You can filter the list by country to see results by ISP. The data is collected from users that visit the site and take part in the test. Keep in mind that the data isn't conclusive as the end-users location, and his hardware, effects the providers offerings and the statistics.
mmaunder 12y ago
Yes migration to IPv6 is essential, but virtual hosting for websites and NAT for ISP subscribers provides a way to indefinitely postpone IPmageddon. This never seems to be mentioned. Also once a block is assigned the actual usage is unpredictable and not reported on that I'm aware of - I know several folks who have blocks assigned by their DC and they're only using a fraction.
- AndrewDucker 12y ago
  So far as I can tell NAT for ISPs is brought up pretty much every time that IPv6 is mentioned on HN. And every time people point out that it breaks the fundamentally decentralised nature of the internet and makes it harder to run P2P services. And also, pretty much every time someone mentions unused blocks, and someone else points out that even if we reclaimed the largest known blocks that aren't publicly routed this would only expand the timeline for a few months.
  - tormeh 12y ago
    >it breaks the fundamentally decentralised nature of the internet and makes it harder to run P2P services Well, those are two things ISPs don't care about...
    - krakensden 12y ago
      Yup. Comcast's ideal world is where they sell TV via IP for $200/month + Amazon.com access with a referral fee, and block everything else.
      - agwa 12y ago
        Comcast has laudably been on the forefront of deploying IPv6. And several other major consumer ISPs in the U.S. are working on deploying it as well (and in the interim, AT&T is offering tunneling with 6RD). Amazon, on the other hand, still does not support IPv6. I browse the Web from Comcast with a Firefox extension that tells me if a site is using IPv6 or not, and the lack of websites supporting IPv6 concerns me way more than the pace of IPv6 rollout by consumer ISPs. There's simply no conspiracy here.
        marcosdumay 12y ago
        There isn't much reason for servers to support IPv6 yet. Clients can use 6to4, and will use it as soon as they become IPv6 only, because... well, there isn't much reason for servers to support IPv6 yet. (Yep, that's circular.) Servers will add support for IPv6 in due time, when admins get used to having it on their machines, and all network equipment supports it, and it stops breaking the sites for people on IPv4 only and people behind slower IPv6 tunnels.
        pdkl95 12y ago
        > Clients can use 6to4 And with that, the transition of the internet from a peer to peer network to a client/server model is finally completed. /not directed at you specifically; I'm just depressed from how efficiently the empower, democratic, anybody-can-publish qualities of the internet are being undone
        marcosdumay 12y ago
        We've already completed that transition when ISPs started blocking ports from their customers. Putting everybody in IPv6 will make things better, and odds are that it will create an entire new crop of descentralized services. But current http and smtp servers gain very little from supporting IPv6 just now.
- muppetman 12y ago
  It annoys me you're being downvoted. I don't necessarily agree with you either, but I see nothing worthy of a downvote here.
thrillscience 12y ago
I don't believe it. It's just like those "peak oil" people. We just need to drill more; we can find more IP addresses.
- hhw 12y ago
  Only for a while. Right now, ARIN IPv4 addresses are easier to get than ever before, as providers are handing out IPv4 addresses out like candy so that they have as much IPv4 space under their control as possible when ARIN runs out. The next phase, as has already begun in the RIPE region, is where IPv4 addresses are bought and sold on the private market. Right now, they go for published rates of between $7-$15 per IP, depending on the size of the block they're sold as. This will probably go up dramatically once all the regional registries (and in particular ARIN) run out. We'll probably then see the price of IPv4 addresses go up higher and higher, as utilization efficiency increases. It remains to be seen how high the costs will go, but it will probably get to a point where the costs of acquiring IPv4 will generally be higher than the costs of implementing IPv6. It will likely only be then that we see wholesale adoption of IPv6. Large portions of the Internet may begin using it before then, but the problem is that IPv4 will continue to be necessary until the whole of the Internet is on IPv6.
  - eli 12y ago
    But IP addresses aren't really fungible, are they? What's the smallest block you could actually transfer to someone in another part of the world?
    - tacticus 12y ago
      a /24 at the moment and let's enjoy watching routing tables explode if that becomes the norm.
    - hhw 12y ago
      Generally, a /24 is the smallest block for which most networks will accept BGP advertisements. You'd generally purchase a /22-/20 or larger though. Note that in most cases, these are (part of) blocks that were assigned before the current regional registries existed, as blocks allocated through the registries aren't actually owned.
jlawer 12y ago
What really surprises me is that by this graph it really seems APNIC is better rationing its allocation the most of the other RIRs with it projecting still having small numbers of IPs available for crossover after 2020. Part of this is that APNIC have limited all new applicants to a /22 when they hit a final /8 available. Existing registrants were offered an ADDITIONAL /22 as their final allocation, and due to successful hand-back of unused space, an additional /22 allocation is available for existing registrants. It seems to ensure that small players (such as startups) can still enter the market and build a viable product without having to worry about it until they are using more the 1024 IPs.
- p1mrx 12y ago
  APNIC is being fairly conservative with their final /8, but the big graph doesn't show the feeding frenzy that abruptly stopped in 2011: http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/fig27h.png http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/fig27h.png Interestingly, the allocation rate has picked up again in the last month or so. I'm guessing that's related to the recent announcement about the "IANA IPv4 Recovered Address Space".
chx 12y ago
I find it very interesting how few /8s are actually advertised vs how many are handed out -- if those graphs are collect then the difference is a quarter of all the IPs???

IPv4 Address Report

27 points by akg_67 12y ago

0x006A 12y ago

anyone knows of an up to date list of providers that offer ipv6 to end users?

diwo 12y ago
See http://ipv6-test.com/stats/ http://ipv6-test.com/stats/. You can filter the list by country to see results by ISP. The data is collected from users that visit the site and take part in the test. Keep in mind that the data isn't conclusive as the end-users location, and his hardware, effects the providers offerings and the statistics.

mmaunder 12y ago

Yes migration to IPv6 is essential, but virtual hosting for websites and NAT for ISP subscribers provides a way to indefinitely postpone IPmageddon. This never seems to be mentioned. Also once a block is assigned the actual usage is unpredictable and not reported on that I'm aware of - I know several folks who have blocks assigned by their DC and they're only using a fraction.

AndrewDucker 12y ago
So far as I can tell NAT for ISPs is brought up pretty much every time that IPv6 is mentioned on HN. And every time people point out that it breaks the fundamentally decentralised nature of the internet and makes it harder to run P2P services. And also, pretty much every time someone mentions unused blocks, and someone else points out that even if we reclaimed the largest known blocks that aren't publicly routed this would only expand the timeline for a few months.
- tormeh 12y ago
  >it breaks the fundamentally decentralised nature of the internet and makes it harder to run P2P services Well, those are two things ISPs don't care about...
  - krakensden 12y ago
    Yup. Comcast's ideal world is where they sell TV via IP for $200/month + Amazon.com access with a referral fee, and block everything else.
    - agwa 12y ago
      Comcast has laudably been on the forefront of deploying IPv6. And several other major consumer ISPs in the U.S. are working on deploying it as well (and in the interim, AT&T is offering tunneling with 6RD). Amazon, on the other hand, still does not support IPv6. I browse the Web from Comcast with a Firefox extension that tells me if a site is using IPv6 or not, and the lack of websites supporting IPv6 concerns me way more than the pace of IPv6 rollout by consumer ISPs. There's simply no conspiracy here.
      - marcosdumay 12y ago
        There isn't much reason for servers to support IPv6 yet. Clients can use 6to4, and will use it as soon as they become IPv6 only, because... well, there isn't much reason for servers to support IPv6 yet. (Yep, that's circular.) Servers will add support for IPv6 in due time, when admins get used to having it on their machines, and all network equipment supports it, and it stops breaking the sites for people on IPv4 only and people behind slower IPv6 tunnels.
        pdkl95 12y ago
        > Clients can use 6to4 And with that, the transition of the internet from a peer to peer network to a client/server model is finally completed. /not directed at you specifically; I'm just depressed from how efficiently the empower, democratic, anybody-can-publish qualities of the internet are being undone
        marcosdumay 12y ago
        We've already completed that transition when ISPs started blocking ports from their customers. Putting everybody in IPv6 will make things better, and odds are that it will create an entire new crop of descentralized services. But current http and smtp servers gain very little from supporting IPv6 just now.
muppetman 12y ago
It annoys me you're being downvoted. I don't necessarily agree with you either, but I see nothing worthy of a downvote here.

thrillscience 12y ago

I don't believe it. It's just like those "peak oil" people. We just need to drill more; we can find more IP addresses.

hhw 12y ago
Only for a while. Right now, ARIN IPv4 addresses are easier to get than ever before, as providers are handing out IPv4 addresses out like candy so that they have as much IPv4 space under their control as possible when ARIN runs out. The next phase, as has already begun in the RIPE region, is where IPv4 addresses are bought and sold on the private market. Right now, they go for published rates of between $7-$15 per IP, depending on the size of the block they're sold as. This will probably go up dramatically once all the regional registries (and in particular ARIN) run out. We'll probably then see the price of IPv4 addresses go up higher and higher, as utilization efficiency increases. It remains to be seen how high the costs will go, but it will probably get to a point where the costs of acquiring IPv4 will generally be higher than the costs of implementing IPv6. It will likely only be then that we see wholesale adoption of IPv6. Large portions of the Internet may begin using it before then, but the problem is that IPv4 will continue to be necessary until the whole of the Internet is on IPv6.
- eli 12y ago
  But IP addresses aren't really fungible, are they? What's the smallest block you could actually transfer to someone in another part of the world?
  - tacticus 12y ago
    a /24 at the moment and let's enjoy watching routing tables explode if that becomes the norm.
  - hhw 12y ago
    Generally, a /24 is the smallest block for which most networks will accept BGP advertisements. You'd generally purchase a /22-/20 or larger though. Note that in most cases, these are (part of) blocks that were assigned before the current regional registries existed, as blocks allocated through the registries aren't actually owned.

jlawer 12y ago

What really surprises me is that by this graph it really seems APNIC is better rationing its allocation the most of the other RIRs with it projecting still having small numbers of IPs available for crossover after 2020. Part of this is that APNIC have limited all new applicants to a /22 when they hit a final /8 available. Existing registrants were offered an ADDITIONAL /22 as their final allocation, and due to successful hand-back of unused space, an additional /22 allocation is available for existing registrants. It seems to ensure that small players (such as startups) can still enter the market and build a viable product without having to worry about it until they are using more the 1024 IPs.

p1mrx 12y ago
APNIC is being fairly conservative with their final /8, but the big graph doesn't show the feeding frenzy that abruptly stopped in 2011: http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/fig27h.png http://www.potaroo.net/tools/ipv4/fig27h.png Interestingly, the allocation rate has picked up again in the last month or so. I'm guessing that's related to the recent announcement about the "IANA IPv4 Recovered Address Space".

chx 12y ago

I find it very interesting how few /8s are actually advertised vs how many are handed out -- if those graphs are collect then the difference is a quarter of all the IPs???