Slashdot Mirror


Millions of Internet Addresses Are Lying Idle

An anonymous reader writes "The most comprehensive scan of the entire internet for several decades shows that millions of allocated addresses simply aren't being used. Professor John Heidemann from the University of Southern California (USC) used ICMP and TCP to scan the internet. Even though the last IPv4 addresses will be handed out in a couple of years, his survey reveals that many of the addresses allocated to big companies and institutions are lying idle. Heidemann says: 'People are very concerned that the IPv4 address space is very close to being exhausted. Our data suggests that maybe there are better things we should be doing in managing the IPv4 address space.' So, is it time to reclaim those unused addresses before the IPv6 crunch?"

17 of 500 comments (clear)

  1. screw ipv4 by k3v0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    lets just switch to IPv6, it's more functional and future proof

    1. Re:screw ipv4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hello. I am Hunvi Maguay, premier of Swaziland. If you have an unused IP address we will buy it from you for $6,000,000 right now. In order for us to send you the money, please send us your bank account number along with proof of identity. Your Social Security number would be good. Please tell us your mother's maiden name too. Hurry, our offer will not last long.

    2. Re:screw ipv4 by Finallyjoined!!! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Internally yes. Externally no. However my point was; everyone who stands up and says "Screw IPv4 let's move to IPv6" should be sat in front of a border router & told to get on with it.

      Everyone can eat salami, precious few can make it.

      --
      If I had an Ass, I'd call it Fanny Bottom, then I could slap my Ass; Fanny Bottom, on the Arse.
    3. Re:screw ipv4 by hedwards · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What you'd do is upgrade the router. That's it.

      Basically new routers would do a 1:1 version of NAT going from IPV6 externally to IPV4 internally. You'd likely still be using the set aside non-connected blocks without problems. As things evolve you'd probably be able to do IPV6 easily internally and ditch that as the network devices support it.

      The difficulty of upgrading to IPV6 has never been on that end it's the other infrastructure and the ISP services which were where the actual work, challenge and money were located.

      I'm sure that there are other ways of doing it, but that's really the simplest and it allows people to transition on the less important end as they care to or not. It wouldn't make a difference for anybody else.

    4. Re:screw ipv4 by __aamnbm3774 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I love all meat references.

      Screw the car-analogy people. Explain how this situation affects me in terms of meats!

    5. Re:screw ipv4 by Sechr+Nibw · · Score: 5, Funny

      Only if you stick it in the Outgoing jack.

    6. Re:screw ipv4 by gnick · · Score: 5, Funny

      The FCC should just mandate a switch to IPv6, if the US leads, the rest of the world tends to follow.

      Exactly.

      Listen up world! We've decided that you all should be using miles, feet, inches, Fahrenheit, and gallons. Please upgrade your silly metric system.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    7. Re:screw ipv4 by BitZtream · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're missing the fact that an IPv6 /64 is what a home user gets, not the total address space. The IPv6 address space is 128 bits, meaning you get 2^64 blocks of 2^64 addresses.

      Meaning every square millimeter of the earths surface can be assigned approximately 667 quadrillion unique addresses. With your math, I personally can assign every 0.29cm^2 of the Earth an address out of my block alone.
      Please see:
      http://en.linuxreviews.org/Why_you_want_IPv6

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  2. Credit crunch by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is curiously similar to the current credit crunch. When a fix is not guaranteed to happen soon, people start hoarding.

  3. Give back class As by Neil+Watson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps some of the institutions that still have class A networks reserved from the old days, with no reasonable need for them, should give them back.

    1. Re:Give back class As by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yup, I work for one of them, GE - the entire "3.x" class-A network, 16million addresses - most of our internal network is those 3.x addresses, behind firewalls so basically useless - and even better, I pinged a few external GE sites I know of, and none of them even use 3.x addresses!!

      maybe 500K employee's & contractors, even add 500K more for servers and unallocated IP's in the ranges, that's still 15*million* unused. Besides which, we could easily run on 10.x internal networking and NAT/Proxy to outside.

      Don't be in a hurry to get them back though... its not a priority! (haha)

  4. Many addr's may be behind firewalls... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    We get this all the time from our ISP's. "Our scans reveal that you're not using much of the space we've allocated to you." In reality, those IP's are behind firewalls that only permit certain customers to reach them. Otherwise they don't respond - even to pings. The IP's appear dead to everyone except authorized users, and our ISP's aren't authorized.

  5. Millions more have been hijacked by Arrogant-Bastard · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In addition to all those lying idle because of excessive address space allocation, there are huge swaths of space which have been hijacked. Recent discussion on the NANOG list has highlighted some of these; the Spamhaus DROP list features others. And other researchers have found still more that are obviously no longer under the control of their putative owners, and are being use for spam, spyware, phishing, and worse. Attempts to get network operators, registrars, ICANN, ARIN, and others to effectively disable these resources -- and eventually to reclaim them -- have been largely unsuccessful. Yes, in some isolated cases, limited action eventualy takes place, but it's far too little far too late to be considered anything close to "effective". We need a concerted, worldwide effort to not only reclaim this space, but to blacklist for life those found currently possessing that -- because (as we've seen repeatedly) they won't be deterred by anything else.

  6. They used ping! by eihab · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the article:

    The USC research group used the most innocuous type of network packet to probe the farthest reaches of the Internet. Known as the Internet Control Message Protocol, or ICMP, this packet is typically used to send error messages between servers and other network hardware.

    My home network is in complete stealth mode, and to them that's another "idle IP" address.

    I also love how they arrived to their conclusion:

    the team probed a million random Internet addresses using both ICMP and TCP, finding a total of 54,297 active hosts ...
    In total, the researchers estimate that there are 112 million responsive addresses ...
    but the overall conclusion--that the Internet has room to grow--is spot on

    How did this ghetto-science experiment end up on Slashdot again?

    --
    If you can't mod them join them.
  7. Re:TCP and ICMP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I drop ICMP entirely

    Then you're an idiot who has no business managing a firewall.

  8. Decades? by Hikaru79 · · Score: 5, Funny

    The most comprehensive scan of the entire internet for several decades

    As opposed to the great Internet scans of the 30s?

  9. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion