ARIN Is Down To the Last /8 of IPv4 Addresses

An anonymous reader writes "On 3 February 2011, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) issued the remaining five /8 address blocks, each containing 16.7 million addresses, in the global free pool equally to the five RIRs, and as such ARIN is no longer able to receive additional IPv4 resources from the IANA. After yesterday's large allocation (104.64.0.0/10) to Akamai, the address pool remaining to be assigned by ARIN is now down to the last /8. This triggers stricter allocation rules and marks the end of general availability of new IPv4 addresses in North America. ARIN thus follows the RIRs of Asia, Europe and South America into the final phase of IPv4 depletion."

Comments

And yet Akamai deserves a /10

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty outrageous that the whole of North America has to go on a diet earlier because Akamai somehow needs a whole fucking /10.

ARIN's behavior has made it clear: you can get all the IPs you want as long as you're a big guy paying big fees. But a small company asking for a /22? Go away, small businesses don't deserve to be able to do business.

Re:And yet Akamai deserves a /10

[Anonymous Coward]

RIR's general policy is if you can prove you require it, you can have it. Akamai clearly have the documentation to prove that they will burn through an entire /10 within a reasonable time frame (It was 3 months at the end in the RIPE region. I'm unsure about ARIN).

Akamai are huge. They claim to provide 15-30% of all web traffic (http://www.akamai.com/html/about/facts_figures.html). Stands to reason that they will likely utilise that all fairly quickly.

As for a company being unable to get a /22? Again, I'm not in the ARIN region, but I'm fairly confident if you can prove you are multi-homed - no problem. You can read their allocation policies here: https://www.arin.net/policy/archive/ipv4.html#multihomed

Re:And yet Akamai deserves a /10

[PRMan]

Akamai is one of the few companies in the US that is actually using a large allocation they were given. They're the LAST ones you should be complaining about.

Re:It didn't matter whether it was last year or ne

[badfish99]

Now that addresses have run out, they have become a valuable resource for the ISPs that own them. If those ISPs implement IPv6 then there will be no shortage of addresses, and they will lose all their value.

So the monopolist ISPs will now do everything in their power to prevent IPv6 from being adopted.

Re:About time!

[cold fjord]

And hopefully more large companies and organizations that hold large blocks of public IP addresses will start moving to private IP addresses and release the public IP addresses for use by others. I know some places that have large numbers of systems with public IP addresses that are behind firewalls and really have no business having a public IP address on those systems anymore.

Re:Wasn't allocation always the problem?

[jareth-0205]

I was going to post the same thing.

If they raise the cost of blocks of addresses sufficiently, many orgs will relinquish their under-utilized addresses and get a smaller block.

And what? We'll buy ourselves another couple of years, at the most? Just fix the problem now and we don't have to worry about this anymore.

4G mobile should have been IPv6 only

[Animats]

Newer mobile phones should have been IPv6 from the beginning. China mandated that years ago. T-Mobile is IPv6. (You can supposedly open up an end to end IPv6 connection between two T-Mobile phones). It's suprising that the cellular phone companies didn't fix this, since they have control of both network and handset.

Re:1/8 and 240/8-255/8

[compro01]

Addresses were being allocated at a rate of about 2 /8s per month just before IANA's pool was depleted back in 2011.

If a new range of addresses became available, then, barring a policy shift, I would expect them to go at a similar rate, if not faster.

Re:About time!

[mikael_j]

Urgh, carrier grade NAT is the last thing the Internet needs.

What's the point of the Internet if there is no end-to-end connectivity?