mailing list archives
Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN
From: Tore Anderson <tore () fud no>
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:48:31 +0200
* Mikael Abrahamsson
Otoh, ARIN isn't exhausted yet so getting IPv4 addresses there should
still be a lot cheaper than doing CGN?
From what I hear several ISPs in the ARIN region prefer to obtain
second-hand IPv4 addresses (or deploy CGN boxes) over requesting
addresses directly from ARIN, and the reason is that ARIN, per policy,
will only give its members addresses to cover three months' worth of
consumption, and that this period is simply too short for the allocation
to be operationally useful, especially for large organisations.
I have an anecdote to share here: A while back, a techie from a large
organisation in the RIPE region told me that from their point of view,
the RIPE NCC was effectively depleted once they implemented the
three-month period for allocations on the 1st of July 2011, because they
needed more than three months to actually put a new allocation in
production - hence they couldn't justify anything any longer.
When transferring, on the other hand, ARIN's policies allows for
obtaining up to 24 months' worth of space. This gives longer-term
operational predictability, which may easily justify the cost of the
addresses themselves. Same thing goes for deploying CGNs instead - the
organisation is then free to plan as far ahead as it feels like, without
being constrained by ARIN policies. That has a value, possibly more than
the cost of the CGN boxes themselves.
Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN Rajiv Asati (rajiva) (Apr 08)
Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN Matthew Kaufman (Apr 07)
Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN Jay Ashworth (Apr 07)
RE: Verizon DSL moving to CGN Staudinger, Malcolm (Apr 08)
Re: Verizon DSL moving to CGN kpospisek (Apr 09)