Re: [44net] A new era of IPv4 Allocations

Thanks for the response Ruben, please find my answer below: To begin with, the TAC sees value in the Intranet and we do not consider it useless. We have a large number of users that agree with this statement and they want this private use case supported. We also believe and try to make connecting to the Internet much easier than it is today. Hopefully we will achieve it with one of the available methods, the Global Backbone / Connectivity Platform. Through this, all private networks like the HAMNET or the Belgium part will be able to connect to each other. But they can do so today, using tunnels and VPNs. The proof that this Intranet is valuable is already here today: most of the 44net users are only on the Intranet. After talking to many users in Germany, which is by far the largest user of IPv4 space today, we always hear that they’re not interested in using these addresses to connect to the Internet, they only want them for the HAMNET-type network they have. We hope that these changes will make it easier for existing and for new users to connect, and it will allow more people to participate. We always have to keep in mind that not everyone wants to do the same we want, and not everyone finds use in the same things that we do. The address space is reserved to *all* radio amateurs and not to some people or use cases. Our mission is to make it available to all of them, without forcing them to use it in a mandated way. And if we all want to co-exist together, we have to play by some rules, and we have to make some sacrifices so access is fair and equal to all. This was the most difficult thing the TAC had to solve: create a network where people can do what they like, and not what *we* like, and if they play by a few very basic rules, then we can all coexist and talk to each other gracefully. As I mentioned in previous e-mails, we want a globally unique IPv4 space that is guaranteed to not overlap with any current or future system that may exist out there. The only type of IPv4 space currently in existence that can guarantee this is Global Unicast. Everything else simply cannot meet this one and very simple requirement. We are not using these addresses because we personally enjoy wasting them, or because we have so many that we may as well waste some of them, but we see their usage as *required* to address the above. We only mention that by using these addresses, we do not bring ARDC into a shortage situation where you won’t be able to receive an allocation because they’re all exhausted. By our estimations we will have way more than enough IPv4 addresses for the future, even if we provide everyone with two allocations in the two use cases. AGAIN: We don’t want to waste them, they’re the only IPv4 addresses that can guarantee no overlapping globally, today and in the future. As I said in a previous e-mail, we know that the methodology is not perfect. We are aware of this, and we tried to take into account. But we believe that it is good enough. We cannot afford to spend 3 years designing the perfect experiment or talk to each and every current and future user individually and ask them about how their network works and how many devices they have. Before we reach the last person, we’d have all the data changed and we’d have more users. Personally I believe that all measurements we used for this decision are accurate to an order of magnitude. I would be very surprised if there are tens of thousands of hosts that block ICMP packets and nobody has heard about them or knows that they exist. Our idea is to not rely on anything. The TAC does not recommend that people use static routes, or BGP, or Windows Servers, or Juniper routers, or anything. We propose this policy to *allow* the people that *want* or *have* to use a static route to be able to join the network. That’s all we want. To enable people to join and enjoy the 44 net, however they like. Thanks, Antonis