[members-discuss] [Ticket#2012072401002498] Probably Free /8 networks in RIPE region

how about the entire class-e space (244/8 and up)

milnet (21,22,26)

etc

all of which not-announced at all.

but better you just switch to v6 :P

as for the e-class space, nobody seems to 'claim' it so just use it lol


On Fri, 27 Jul 2012, Paolo Di Francesco wrote:

> Hi William
>
>
>> WIND uses by far *more* than 5mil IPs - They are the second largest
>> access provider in Italy, in fact they are so short already that they
>> run NAT now...
>
> I guess it's not the only net allocated to wind, but just to make things
> clear regarding the IPv4-IPv6 situation in Italy:
>
> 1) at the current date each provider MUST allocate one public IPv4 for
> each contract (not customer, contract, which means if you have one
> company with 50 employees at minimum one public IPv4 must be allocated)
> 2) NAT (=multiple customers beyond one public IP) with some form of
> "connection tracking" has been proposed, but yet not accepted by the
> Italian government
> 3) the big telco told us that dual stack cannot be done and they will
> never implement it so far because:
> 3.a) there is no mobile device well supporting IPv6
> 3.b) IPv6 traffic is insignificant, the traffic is only IPv4 (well if
> they do not provider IPv6 to customers I see some barriers to have IPv6
> traffic...)
> 3.c) IPv6 WILL NOT HAPPEN for a looooong time, and they will NOT provide
> dual stack
> 3.d) xDSL modems do not support IPv6 (maybe they should change modem
> brand, I don't know)
> 3.e) operating systems are not supporting IPv6
>
> We asked them to give dual stack, but the message that I have heard is:
> no only IPv4 and NAT is the solution for the future, then maybe in some
> years (5? 10? 20??) we will reconsider IPv6
>
> Therefore I see small and medium ISP running dual stack to be "future
> ready" while large operators in Italy will run IPv4 and NAT for a long,
> long time.
>
> Now if RIPE will consider a dual fee for IPv4 and IPv6 I guess that it
> will not help small LIRs to implement IPv6 and that will be a huge
> damage for the whole community.
>
> It will be funny that small ISP are implementing IPv6 and maybe paying
> more than big telcos.
>
> Regarding the IPv4-IPv6 policy, my personal opinion is that it's a
> commercial war: the longer IPv6 dual stack or transition will take, the
> better will be to keep the market closed and the current positions
> untouched.
>
> Should we consider an extra fee if you do NOT use IPv6 for customers????
>
> But as I said, we should split the two discussions: one regarding IPv4
> and IPv6 allocation (and mistakes of the past, when nobody knew what the
> hell was an IP) and another one regarding RIPE fees. Not saying those
> two things are not related just saying that IPv4 re-allocation policy
> for huge systems should be taken into serious consideration
>
> As a last note: if Wind and other operators are using NAT and they are
> happy with that (instead of implementing dual stack and migration
> mechanisms) then they DO NOT NEED IPv4, and then then can give it back
> to RIPE. If with one IPv4 you can put 1,000-10,000 customers, hey we are
> 60 millions in Italy we need few public IPv4 for big LIRS, right?
>
> Best regards
>
>
> -- 
>
>
> Ing. Paolo Di Francesco
>
> Level7 s.r.l. unipersonale
>
> Sede operativa: Largo Montalto, 5 - 90144 Palermo
>
> C.F. e P.IVA  05940050825
> Fax : +39-091-8772072
> assistenza: (+39) 091-8776432
> web: http://www.level7.it
>
>
>
>
> ----
> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss
> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page:
> https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
>
> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
>