Slashdot Mirror


Black Market May Develop For IPv4 Addresses

GMGruman writes "Everyone knows that we're running out of traditional IPv4 Internet addresses and that switching to IPv6 is the answer — yet foot-dragging by IT departments and vendors means the problem is still on the back burner. IPv4/IPv6 coexistence is now expected to last for 5 years. In this article, Mel Beckman explains how this is all leading to a black market in traditional IPv4 addresses that will catch many people off-guard, and boost Internet access prices sky-high."

44 of 282 comments (clear)

  1. Public IPs at premium prices by DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You mean they will start NATing more often for residential customers. Long gone will be the default of having a dynamic Public IP address. Want one of those? That will cost extra.

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:Public IPs at premium prices by wish+bot · · Score: 2, Funny

      Double NAT, double good!

      P.S. 10.1.x.x going cheap. Mail me!

      --
      lemonade was a popular drink and it still is
    2. Re:Public IPs at premium prices by Mordok-DestroyerOfWo · · Score: 5, Funny

      "What would you do if you had a million dollars?"

      "I'll tell you what I'd do, man: two IPv4 addresses at the same time, man."

      --
      "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
    3. Re:Public IPs at premium prices by youn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      my provider uses 10.* addresses there therefore I had to change the addressing scheme on my LAN because I didn't want stuff routed accidentally... pisses me off... I'm sure more and more providers will do that... and that's accidents waiting to happen.

      Ahhh, I long for the days when a private address was garanteed to be private. why don't they switch already to ipv6... it's been 15 years. I know it will irk some people but it's stable enough and it's about time... and as time passes it's going to get harder because people will be more dependent on the internet.

      Most OSs & routers are compatible... I say it's time to require the change... give people a 6 month warning and switch... should be plenty of time to address most issues

      --
      Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that :p
    4. Re:Public IPs at premium prices by optikos · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not quite. Numerically, you will still have the same "public" IPv4 address that you have today (either dynamic or static). It is just that it will be like that _Star Trek NG_ episode where, upon hearing something munching on the Enterprise's hull, Dr. Crusher asks the ship's computer "What is the nature of the universe?" to which the answer comes back "The universe is an oblate spheroid one kilometer in diameter." In the IPv4-lives-on-forever world, "public" will be redefined to "among all of the subscribers of the same ISP" (not "worldwide" anymore). Then *all* IPv4 addresses (other than loopback and test ranges) will be NATed between ISPs/carriers. In other words, there will not be one Internet address-space anymore, but rather one IPv4-sized address space per ISP/carrier/telco. The goal is to carve the single Internet up into multiple per-telco Internets with interworking at the telco-to-telco or ISP-to-ISP boundary. There will be the AT&T Internet and separately the Verizon Internet and separately the Deutsche Telekom Internet and so forth.

    5. Re:Public IPs at premium prices by feepness · · Score: 4, Informative

      It is just that it will be like that _Star Trek NG_ episode where, upon hearing something munching on the Enterprise's hull, Dr. Crusher asks the ship's computer "What is the nature of the universe?" to which the answer comes back "The universe is an oblate spheroid one kilometer in diameter."

      Dude, there was nothing munching on the hull, people were disappearing because she had dropped into a collapsing warp bubble of her own private universe!

      CRUSHER: Computer, what's happening?
      COMPUTER: Explosive decompression decks five through fourteen. Sealing off forward sections.
      CRUSHER: Cause?
      COMPUTER: A flaw in the ship's design.
      CRUSHER: Show me. Analysis.
      COMPUTER: No ship's structures exist forward of bulkhead three four two.


      God!

    6. Re:Public IPs at premium prices by ls671 · · Score: 4, Informative

      > my provider uses 10.* addresses there therefore I had to change the
      > addressing scheme on my LAN because

      Why did you chose 10.x.x.x for your LAN in the first place ? I doubt that you are planning to connect 16,777,216 machines to your LAN ;-)

      Guide lines are to use:

      192.168.X.X if you need 65,536 IP addresses or less

      172.16.X.X-172.31.X.X if you need between 65,536 and 1,048,576 IP addresses

      10.X.X.X if you need between 1,048,576 and 16,777,216 IP addresses

      Routing is slightly faster with more bits in your netmask. Although I do not think that you will notice a difference especially nowadays. I think this was one of the reasons for these guidelines. Following the guide lines also ease connectivity to bigger nated networks, your provider in your case.

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    7. Re:Public IPs at premium prices by DavidRawling · · Score: 5, Informative

      Because every damn organisation I VPN to uses 192.168.x.x addresses, or 172.[16-32].x.x addresses. By using a 10.x with a 24 bit mask I can use space that doesn't route, doesn't conflict with the orgs I VPN to, and that doesn't require me to reconfigure.

    8. Re:Public IPs at premium prices by plan10 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why not use 10 if it's a home network? The point of private reserved is that it should be, you know, private.

    9. Re:Public IPs at premium prices by KiloByte · · Score: 2

      10.X.X.X if you need between 1,048,576 and 16,777,216 IP addresses

      Or if you want to have any sanity in your VPNs.

      Like, 10.X.X.*/24 is a physical network, 10.X.*.*/16 are networks at one localisation, 10.*.*.*/8 are all connected private networks together.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  2. Truth is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    IPv4 is like oil. It'll never go away.

    Luckily, IPv4 isn't a bad technology.

    1. Re:Truth is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      IPv4 might be, but IPv4 addresses certainly are not like oil. The remaining addresses are not harder to find or costlier to acquire. The rate at which these addresses are assigned will increase right up to the very end, when suddenly there won't be new any new allocations, first by the IANA to the RIRs and then by the regional internet registries to ISPs. The supply of IPv4 addresses is finite. We know that we need more addresses than there are, the vast majority of addresses are already assigned and the rate of assignment is increasing. Right now everybody's hoarding IPv4 addresses: They're used as leniently as possible. Got a server? Get three addresses automatically. Why? Because that's a good enough excuse to get an allocation from the RIR. When there are no more allocations available, then the big redistribution of IPv4 addresses begins. Customers will have to start paying for addresses that were formerly included for free. This way there will still be addresses available for new applications, but they'll be taken from other applications (ones where they're not really needed at first, but eventually it will be a matter of who pays more.)

    2. Re:Truth is by Miamicanes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Forget what's officially on paper regarding the lower 64 bits of an IPv6 address. As a practical matter, the bits are yours to use, or yours to intentionally discard and ignore. Nobody can force you to use an unholy address with 128 pseudo-meaningful bits. In reality, a typical home cable internet or DSL customer should get a /48 address. That means the upper 48 bits are assigned by your ISP, and the lower 80 bits are yours to use or ignore as you please.

      48 bits translates into three chunks of the address. Initially, they'll look like this:

      2001:xxxx:xxxx

      where xxxx:xxxx is unique for your global service provider (read: AT&T, Global Crossing, Telia, etc), and the top few bits are unique to your country. Eventually, the top 16 bits (first chunk) will be unique to a country. So unless you're in Europe, 99% of the addresses you deal with daily will start with the same chunk. A little more annoying than a.b.c.d, but not quite insurmountable.

      Now, the lower 80 bits. Officially, there's some nonsense somewhere about using the MAC address to derive it. It's voluntary, and lots of people have said they won't be following it because it turns your ethernet card into a globally-unique cookie that can be shared via out of band means. It's led to no small number of fights between the autoconfiguration faction and the DHCP6 faction. In the long run, the DHCP6 faction will win. So, getting back to those 80 bits...

      Right now, you're dealing with 64 bits whether you know it or not: the 32 bits in your public IP address, and the 32 bits in your NAT'ed private addressses. Your home PC's IP address isn't 64.82.19.34, it's 64.82.19.34 + 192.168.100.69, with a port-forwarding router in the middle to glue them together. There's nothing to stop you from treating your IPv6 address the same way, even if it slightly stomps on the original official intent of how the bits should be used. If you want to, your home PC's 80-bit IPv6 address can be ::1. More likely than not, your router (still needed for 6-4 translation) will be ::1 though, so let's make your home pc ::2. So, here's your home PC's new IPv6 address: 2001:aaaa:bbbb:cccc::2 (aaaa, bbbb, and cccc are 16-bit hex values). Or maybe uuuu.aaaa.bbbb.cccc (where "uuuu" is the same for most addresses you encounter at the raw address level daily).

      Let's suppose you want to be cute, and have a home network whose 4 and 6 aspects cleanly map to each other, and you don't mind doing some ugly binary math behind the scenes for the sake of human-readability. Your internal network's ipv4 addresses are in the 192.168.100.x block. Your 4-6 router is 192.168.100.1, and your desktop PC is 192.168.100.2. So, you configure your IPv6 addresses to be:

      uuuu:aaaa:bbbb:cccc::192:168:100:1 and uuuu:aaaa:bbbb:cccc::192:168:100:2 for the router and PC. Yes, in this case, you're abusing bits and pretending that 0x0192 means something special (the way 192 meant 0xC0, which had a special meaning to the router), but it's mainly to illustrate that IPv6 addresses don't HAVE to be horrific trainwrecks of unmemorable bits. If you're determined, you can make them look quite a bit like ipv4 addresses within the realm of your own network if you really want to. At the end of the day, is

      24:3cf2:8d99::2 (your home PC), or even 24:3cf2:8d99::192:168:100:2

      really any worse than

      64.87.142.98 -> 192.168.100.2 ??

      The truth is, the IPv6 crowd has been its own worst enemy by trying to force needless address complexity. IPv6 has lots of bits, and if you ignore the majority that you're entitled to ignore, it doesn't have to be a lot worse than ipv4. It can even be better.

  3. I fail to see the black market part by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So if I have IPs, and someone else needs IPs, I sell them some of my IPs... What's the problem here? For that matter, that is how it works for anyone who's not a big provider. When I wanted static IPs for my cable connection I asked my cable ISP. They said sure, $5/month/each.

    I'm just not sure I see a problem. Goes double since higher IPv4 prices may encourage IPv6. Consider:

    Say I'm an ISP, we have all old v4 hardware. To the extent our routers support v6, it is all in software meaning that any significant amount of IPv6 will overload them. They only have IPv4 ASICs. I don't wanna upgrade because it is expensive. So I keep getting more and more customers that want IPs. However, I run out, my allocation is gone. ARIN says "Sorry, all space is allocated." So I go looking around. Turns out I can buy a /24... But for 500x what I used to. Ouch. Well then, maybe time to get some IPv6 hardware.

    Likewise it could encourage customers to want IPv6. A company buys a net connection and says "We need 32 IPs." ISP says "Well you can have 32 v4 IPs for $3200/month, or you can have as many IPv6 IPs as you want, and 1 IPv4 IP for 6-to-4." Company says "Oh ok, v6 may be more of a pain, but it is worth it to save the money."

    What it comes down to is we need to migrate away from IPv4. That'll be a long process, but one thing that'll help it along is if there's economic incentive to move to IPv6. Right now, the situation is generally that there is an economic DISincentive to move to v6. You need new hardware, sometimes new software, etc. It costs money and IPv4 works fine. However, if v4 starts costing more, that makes v6 more attractive.

    So I don't see this as a "black market" nor do I see it as a big problem.

    1. Re:I fail to see the black market part by Tuzanor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Any market that forms that people don't want to form is a black market. They'd prefer some "benevolent" agency to dole out the limited amount, nevermind that a few organizations are holding massive amounts of unused IP ranges. Making them worth money will encourage them to release them, but these people are afraid of markets.

    2. Re:I fail to see the black market part by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Any market that forms that people don't want to form is a black market. They'd prefer some "benevolent" agency to dole out the limited amount, nevermind that a few organizations are holding massive amounts of unused IP ranges. Making them worth money will encourage them to release them, but these people are afraid of markets.

      I think you're confusing "afraid of markets" with "afraid of unregulated markets".

      If you don't understand why unregulated markets are bad, feel free to pickup a history book and look at the American business landscape in the 100 years preceding the 1930s.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    3. Re:I fail to see the black market part by optikos · · Score: 3, Informative

      Any market that forms that people don't want to form is a black market.

      No, you have effectively defined "gray market" instead: an unauthorized market in commercial goods. Now if we were to pass a law that makes possession of an IPv4 address (or /8 IPv4 address) a crime (especially a felony instead of misdemeanor), then it becomes a black market. black = crime in criminal courts. gray = unauthorized breech of contract in civil courts.

    4. Re:I fail to see the black market part by timeOday · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They'd prefer some "benevolent" agency to dole out the limited amount, nevermind that a few organizations are holding massive amounts of unused IP ranges.

      Not "nevermind" - that's exactly why the IP addresses should be doled out by a regulator and NOT resold. Just because some chain of company buyouts leads back from you to somebody that requested a /8 when they were given away for free, does NOT mean you have somehow "earned" millions of dollars in any meaningful sense. There is NO reason to financially reward such behavior.

      The free-market-true-believers-under-all-circumstances crowd is correct that markets always find some solution, but why can't they see that sometimes it's a bad one?

    5. Re:I fail to see the black market part by shadowbearer · · Score: 4, Insightful

        Except where the corporations can buy whatever regulated market they wish to, and individuals have no choice in the matter. I agree with you, but the last decade, at least, has shown that government regulation in this country is for sale to the highest bidder.

      SB

      --
      It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
    6. Re:I fail to see the black market part by timeOday · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A market based solution would be good if IP addresses were leased instead of (permanently) given away in the first place. Curently, even a charge of e.g. $1/address/year would free up millions of addresses given away in huge blocks in the early days to a small number of businesses and universities.

    7. Re:I fail to see the black market part by Myopic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Whoa, dude, whoa. Do NOT try to start a fight with a free-market ideologue and try to use facts or historical evidence to support your position. That's even more foolish than trying to convince a creationist about evolution by using the fossil record as evidence. These people will never, ever, ever admit that their simple little ideology doesn't perfectly explain the complexity of the real world.

      Just let it go, man. Save yourself the trouble.

  4. Can /8 companies resell subnets? by HockeyPuck · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Could an organization with a /8 resell a block of their IP addresses? I can't imagine how someone like MIT or US Postal Service, could use 16million IP addresses, or HP use 32million (they have their own plus Compaq/DECs).

    1. Re:Can /8 companies resell subnets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem with this is that it's likely to be more expensive to reconfigure their networks, internal address allocations, and everybody's routing tables in the world for those cut up /8's than it will be to just upgrade to IPv6. If somebody really needs v4 addresses that badly and want some space from these /8 holders, then they'll need to make it worth their while to start splitting them up.

  5. For Sale by gooman · · Score: 4, Funny

    Slightly used internet address.
    Act now and 127.0.0.0 could be yours today!
    Only $5.00!

    --
    "Kittens give Morbo gas!"
    1. Re:For Sale by daveime · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's only an estimated 10^82 atoms in the universe. Just to put your 10^999 in perspective.

    2. Re:For Sale by blueg3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      People don't understand numbers, they just hit the "0" and "9" keys until the number they're typing in "looks big" or "looks small".

    3. Re:For Sale by gmhowell · · Score: 2, Funny

      People don't understand numbers, they just hit the "0" and "9" keys until the number they're typing in "looks big" or "looks small".

      0.00000000000000000000009

      I keep putting more zeroes in, and it's just not getting bigger.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  6. Re:IPv4 Address depletion? by paul248 · · Score: 4, Funny

    IPv4 depletion was a looming problem in 2005, and today it's an even more closely-looming problem. It's not like we discovered more numbers since then.

  7. Psst! Wanna buy a slash 32? Primo qualtity. by khasim · · Score: 2, Funny

    I know a guy who can get you a slash 29, but it'll cost you.

    More of a technical issue ... how are the people in this "black market" going to handle the routing?

    1. Re:Psst! Wanna buy a slash 32? Primo qualtity. by the_other_chewey · · Score: 4, Funny

      More of a technical issue ... how are the people in this "black market" going to handle the routing?

      Tar. Routes don't get much blacker than that.

  8. Re:A black market may develop by pipedwho · · Score: 2, Insightful

    According to the article, that time was yesterday.

    The authors of TFA estimate that in less than a year ARIN will have no more /8 blocks left to allocate.

  9. Black Market by Arancaytar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    How do you secretly buy something that only works, by definition, if the public routing table knows it belongs to you?

  10. Re:another shit kdawson post by Sanhedran · · Score: 5, Funny

    i guess.. in the same way the universe will eventually run out of energy.

    "It was like a million high school physics teachers crying out in unison, then suddenly silenced."

  11. I'll be rich! by Illogical+Spock · · Score: 5, Funny

    1) Connect to my dynamic IP address ISP
    2) Post ad on eBay for the IP
    3) Sell it
    4) Disconnect
    5) Repeat from 1 to 5
    6) Profit!

    --
    --- Illogical Spock
    1. Re:I'll be rich! by HyperQuantum · · Score: 2, Funny

      line 6: warning: unreachable code detected

      --
      I am not really here right now.
  12. Re:A black market may develop by RobertM1968 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    According to the article, that time was yesterday.

    The authors of TFA estimate that in less than a year ARIN will have no more /8 blocks left to allocate.

    Which has nothing to do with how many are sitting unused by ISPs and large companies sitting on big IP blocks.

  13. Skyrocketing prices solves the problem by Kohath · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If IPv4 addresses become very expensive, people will just ... switch to IPv6.

    Yeah. That's how free markets solve problems, be they black, or any other color.

  14. Haliburton's /8 by soundguy · · Score: 5, Funny

    ARIN had a booth at Interop last week. I asked them why they don't confiscate the /8 that's assigned to Haliburton, which is mostly wasted. They said they don't want to get shot.

    --
    Nothing worthwhile ever happens before noon
  15. I'd be using it... by dandart · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd be using IPv6 if only my ISP supported it. I think all ISPs should get on with getting it out there, and then give us one by default. Then no one would have to worry, except the ISPs. Because IPv4's going to run out so soon, I'd recommend a nice round date for the deadline for the Internet switchover - 1/1/2011.

  16. Only a problem if your ISP doesn't support IPv6 by cheeseandham · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Do something about it, you are a customer after all. (Assuming you have a choice about which ISP you give your business to, and aren't in some horrible monopoly situation)

    i) Complain to your ISP, ask them why they don't support IPv6
    ii) Threaten to switch to an ISP that does support IPv6
    iii) Actually switch to an ISP that supports IPv6, and tell your old ISP why you are moving.

    Companies will listen to their wallets, if nothing else.

    and yes, my ISP supports IPv6 native & tunneled and has a 6to4 gateway if you don't want to dual-stack

  17. use too much space in 10.x.x.x/8? use 11.x.x.x by speculatrix · · Score: 4, Funny

    I worked on contract in IT dept of an international bank based in the UK, actually somewhat in the north, more I dare not say. They used addresses from 10/8 like crazy, and when they ran out, started using 11/8

    Some of the skeptics will think I'm making it up. Battle-hardened IT pros will probably facepalm and know it has the ring of truth and that no-one would possibly come up with such a stupid plan and therefore it must be true!

  18. what happened to by kpjlfm · · Score: 3, Funny

    What happened to IPv5?? Did it go the way of the Oral A toothbrush?

  19. He really didn't understand by kevmeister · · Score: 4, Insightful
    As one of the primary sources for this article, I'm rather distressed that the author really missed much of the point of a talk I made several months ago. When I spoke with Mr. Beckman, he was not clear on how the Internet numbering system works and, while he was was close in this article, he still does not appear to quite get it.

    One thing he got exactly right is that "If people have legitimate rules that permit address transfers, they'll use them instead of a black market." There is now a formal ARIN transfer policy which will allow transfers of address space for payment. This is the critical bit that will probably prevent any significant black market from developing and, more importantly, having any real impact on the Internet at large.

    The other thing that is absolutely right was his calling me an "pseudo economist". I am an engineer, not an economist, even if I do play one from time to time.

    the one things I must say is that the IPv4 address space is near exhaustion and things will change. The adoption of IPv6, it undertaken soon and in a competent manner, looks to be far the most likely way to the future. Not the only way, but the only way I see to continue the growth of the Internet as we know it today. It does not mean that massive NAT implementation, which will eventually re-shape the Internet into a very different thing, won't be what happens.

    Then again, I am only a "pseudo Economist" and even the real economists don't agree very often.

    --
    Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
    1. Re:He really didn't understand by mbeckman · · Score: 2, Informative

      When I spoke with Mr. Beckman, he was not clear on how the Internet numbering system works and, while he was was close in this article, he still does not appear to quite get it.

      Kev, Thanks for participating in the article. In our interview it was never my intention to try and convey to you my depth of knowledge, but rather to elicit from you a clear explanation of your NANOG paper. Which I did, thank you very much! I assure you, however, that I'm reasonably competent at IP addressing concepts, since I run BGP myself and also deploy BGP and IPv6 implementations for enterprises. And I teach IPv6 courses around the world (I was in Toronto doing ao last week, which is why I had a deadline crunch on your interview).