Bill, The best person to answer is Brian Kantor. Till he chimes in...
I don't expect to see IPv4 switched off on the general internet in my lifetime. The adoption rate of v6 is pretty sad. We don't even have everyone dual stacks yet.
There has been some casual discussions from foreign hams to try and get an IPv6 allocation for ham radio from RIPE ( I believe).. but there will be so many addresses available I am not even sure ham radio needs its own allocation.
Moving forward the whole online ham authentication thing (that OH7LZB has pointed out) makes more sense in my opinion. Use one of your many-many IPv6 addreses from your ISP, but add some sort of authentication to the process of interacting with other ham services. That is presently a lure of 44net.. knowing the guy on the other end is a ham, and whatever traffic is being generated (VOIP, data etc) should it key an actual transmitter it will be legit.
[There was a proposal in 1998 to encode a "call sign" into IPv6 address titled "Take the Next Step with the Next Generation Protocol" by Naoto Shimazaki. And in 2012 a few members from the Mesa Amateur Radio Club of Arizona took this to code.)
I guess the more pertinent questions I have for Brian would be:
Are there a plan so that folks who only have IPv6 commercial address or are suck behind carrier grade IPv4 with no firewall access (some cellular carriers presently) can participate with the amprnet? In other words are there plans to make amprgw dual stack?
73 Steve, KB9MWR
OM,
I'm a bit behind the times, so please bear with me. Is there a plan and schedule for ampr.net to convert to IPv6?
Is there a consensus on the conversion? We're a pretty small part of the net, after all, and my first >reaction to thinking of IPv6 is "Do I have to?"
BTW, will ucsd be able to tunnel IPv4 44/8 addresses over IPv6?
As I said, I'm out of practice with networking, and I just realized that I don't know if/when the ampr.net >will switchover, nor how it will affect the existing 44/8 allocations. Brian?
Thanks for your time.
73,
Bill, W4EWH
On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 01:36:10AM -0500, Steve L wrote:
I guess the more pertinent questions I have for Brian would be:
Are there a plan so that folks who only have IPv6 commercial address or are suck behind carrier grade IPv4 with no firewall access (some cellular carriers presently) can participate with the amprnet? In other words are there plans to make amprgw dual stack?
(I think you meant 'stuck', not 'suck'. Is that a Freudian slip?)
There's no plan to make amprgw dual stack. I'm not sure that the question is meaningful; what would it DO with an incoming IPv6-only packet? It's not going to be a NAT64 gateway, that's for certain.
Interoperability of IPv4-only and IPv6-only hosts is a sticky wicket that in my opinion NO ONE has solved satisfactorily. - Brian
On 4/09/2017 5:08 PM, Brian Kantor wrote:
(I think you meant 'stuck', not 'suck'. Is that a Freudian slip?)
There's no plan to make amprgw dual stack. I'm not sure that the question is meaningful; what would it DO with an incoming IPv6-only packet? It's not going to be a NAT64 gateway, that's for certain.
Interoperability of IPv4-only and IPv6-only hosts is a sticky wicket that in my opinion NO ONE has solved satisfactorily.
- Brian
My interpretation of the question was whether the gateway would support tunnels running over IPv6 to carry 44/8 traffic. That way, endpoints on DS-Lite, for instance, could tunnel their 44/8 traffic over IPv6, and those of us with dual stack might be able to avoid the usual issues with routers that don't support IPIP encap packets over NAT properly.
On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 05:41:43PM +1000, Tony Langdon wrote:
My interpretation of the question was whether the gateway would support tunnels running over IPv6 to carry 44/8 traffic. That way, endpoints on DS-Lite, for instance, could tunnel their 44/8 traffic over IPv6, and those of us with dual stack might be able to avoid the usual issues with routers that don't support IPIP encap packets over NAT properly.
No, I don't think so. The subnet that amprgw is on is not currently IPv6 enabled and therefore amprgw has no IPv6 address. It can't communicate with IPv6-only hosts.
Perhaps some day in the future, but there's no plan for it. - Brian
Most are not aware IPv6 and IPv4 are not inter-operable and we don't have a DNS64/NAT64 mechanism in place anyway. I read about it back when I was dabbling in IPv6 back in 2012/2013 timeframe. I think I'm going to bring my IPv6 tunnel back up.
Tom Cardinal/N2XU/MSgt USAF (Ret)/BSCS/CASP, Security+ ce
On 9/4/2017 03:57, Brian Kantor wrote:
It can't communicate with IPv6-only hosts.
Couple of points:
Current users of IPv4 44 group are international amateur radio operators that are currently far beyond mainstream amateur radio casual users of the 'World Wide Web', using their knowledge in non-Windows based programs and techniques with a steep learning curve, as I understand it.
Therefore, there is little to no popularized appeal to the casual potential amateur radio user of 44 group addresses.
As for me, a casual reader of this group, I would love to be able to create a sub-net in the 44 reserved area within my devices (desktop, laptop, notebook, smartphone or tablet, smart ham radio) and be able to link or 'tunnel in' and share my home station equipment outputs, or to remote my station and related equipment.
Some missed or forgotten opportunities I would like to have seen using an IPv4 44 group address in amateur radio might be: Subnet for my amateur radio used computers (using ipconfig); Packet wormhole (yes, I used them in the past, but life is too short for 1200 baud PBBS); APRS-IS (tier 1, 2, 3 and more, especially everyday users using aprs.fi and others); Echolink and IRLP (or any future Voice over IP - VOIP); WinLink 2000 (for last mile Internet carried email via amateur radio); Remote Station (individual or club station linking by a more modest operator station); HSMM (High Speed Multi Media/ Mesh); Amateur Television and who knows what else in my amateur radio future.
Instead, amateur radio operators are instead using commercial addresses allotted from ISP vendors, where costs prohibit an assigned fixed address. Perhaps the ISP may be route to their 44 group address from any assigned and random address, If only they could convince their ISP provider to let them use an alias subnet from the 44 group, easily obtained by a non-existant central registry.
*If we can not make the 44 group more available with good to fair popularizing of applications to everyday amateur radio operators, it will be gone before we know it. *
With a larger base of everyday 44 group users in our amateur radio community, there would be more justification for future dedicated assignments in IPv6 addresses. We were lucky to get IPv4 block fro amateur radio experimentation, and it seems one (or more) individuals were able to make it so. Thanks for that, but it sad the window is closing on this era.
73 de Pat KC6VVT
R. Patrick Ryan ARS: KC6VVT, ASEC/IL, OES/IL, Grid: EN51lf, email: kc6vvt@gmail.com Facebook for ham related: http://www.facebook.com/KC6VVT/info
On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 6:32 PM, Tom Cardinal ki4szj@gmail.com wrote:
Most are not aware IPv6 and IPv4 are not inter-operable and we don't have a DNS64/NAT64 mechanism in place anyway. I read about it back when I was dabbling in IPv6 back in 2012/2013 timeframe. I think I'm going to bring my IPv6 tunnel back up.
Tom Cardinal/N2XU/MSgt USAF (Ret)/BSCS/CASP, Security+ ce
On 9/4/2017 03:57, Brian Kantor wrote:
It can't communicate with IPv6-only hosts.
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
There are 1.8 * 10^19 /64 IPv6 subnets. Why do we need a block? We can just use individual, dedicated IPv6 subnets for every ham on the planet, and never make a tiny dent in the available subnets. Let's get away from the central-hub-oriented architecture of the 44 net, and 'go native'.
Yes, we're going to need some gateways for linking IPv4 and IPv6 networks during the transition - these already exist for a number of protocols (e.g. http). Other services like email servers may need to remain dual stack for some time, or we may need to use relay servers.
But please, we need an architecture that involves very little administrative overhead, and with as little central control as possible. The sticking point is usually in how to determine that we're allowing legal ham traffic onto the ham bands, perhaps a set of certificate-issuing facilities of some sort. This would make it possible to have a number of facilities around the globe, independent of one another, that would issue certificates that ham stations would use to identify valid ham traffic coming over the Internet. The certs would not be needed over the air, eliminating issues about ham traffic encryption laws in most countries. If a particular certificate authority became an issue, it can be invalidated. In countries like the US, each state or region could have its own cert issuer. In smaller countries with few hams, several countries might get together and have a single cert issuer, rather than one per country.
There are already places on the Internet where customers have only IPv6 client addresses - and this is growing. We need to move to the forefront of such technology, not wait around and be followers.
- Richard, VE7CVS
On 9/9/2017 12:41 PM, Patrick Ryan KC6VVT wrote:
Couple of points:
Current users of IPv4 44 group are international amateur radio operators that are currently far beyond mainstream amateur radio casual users of the 'World Wide Web', using their knowledge in non-Windows based programs and techniques with a steep learning curve, as I understand it.
Therefore, there is little to no popularized appeal to the casual potential amateur radio user of 44 group addresses.
As for me, a casual reader of this group, I would love to be able to create a sub-net in the 44 reserved area within my devices (desktop, laptop, notebook, smartphone or tablet, smart ham radio) and be able to link or 'tunnel in' and share my home station equipment outputs, or to remote my station and related equipment.
Some missed or forgotten opportunities I would like to have seen using an IPv4 44 group address in amateur radio might be: Subnet for my amateur radio used computers (using ipconfig); Packet wormhole (yes, I used them in the past, but life is too short for 1200 baud PBBS); APRS-IS (tier 1, 2, 3 and more, especially everyday users using aprs.fi and others); Echolink and IRLP (or any future Voice over IP - VOIP); WinLink 2000 (for last mile Internet carried email via amateur radio); Remote Station (individual or club station linking by a more modest operator station); HSMM (High Speed Multi Media/ Mesh); Amateur Television and who knows what else in my amateur radio future.
Instead, amateur radio operators are instead using commercial addresses allotted from ISP vendors, where costs prohibit an assigned fixed address. Perhaps the ISP may be route to their 44 group address from any assigned and random address, If only they could convince their ISP provider to let them use an alias subnet from the 44 group, easily obtained by a non-existant central registry.
*If we can not make the 44 group more available with good to fair popularizing of applications to everyday amateur radio operators, it will be gone before we know it. *
With a larger base of everyday 44 group users in our amateur radio community, there would be more justification for future dedicated assignments in IPv6 addresses. We were lucky to get IPv4 block fro amateur radio experimentation, and it seems one (or more) individuals were able to make it so. Thanks for that, but it sad the window is closing on this era.
73 de Pat KC6VVT
The present 44net requires each gateway to communicate directly with each other, rather than through a central hub. But I hear you, we'd be in the same boat with our own IPv6 allocation.
OH7LZB has shown a basic proof of concept, showing how to use a P12 Log of The World Digital Certificate to verify who you are. We just need to attract some talent to 44net to get someone to take that a step further. For an automated DNS so folks can register their IPv6 hosts, etc. (John K7VE has a good start, minus the automatic certificate to user account part at http://ar-dns.net/) (I think I have QRZ talked into implementing uploading your cert to become a verified user (a star on your profile for swapmeet buying confidence etc)
Maybe that is what we should be talking about. How to promote ourselves and recruit some talented coders. That is what it takes to make things happen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7anDmQQfyu8 https://github.com/hessu/ham-cert-web-demo
<snip>
Let's get away from the central-hub-oriented architecture of the 44 net, and 'go native'.
But please, we need an architecture that involves very little administrative overhead, and with as little central control as possible. The sticking point is usually in how to determine that we're allowing legal ham traffic onto the ham bands, perhaps a set of certificate-issuing facilities of some sort. This would make it possible to have a number of facilities around the globe, independent of one another, that would issue certificates that ham stations would use to identify valid ham traffic coming over the Internet. The certs would not be needed over the air, eliminating issues about ham traffic encryption laws in most countries. If a particular certificate authority became an issue, it can be invalidated. In countries like the US, each state or region could have its own cert issuer. In smaller countries with few hams, several countries might get together and have a single cert issuer, rather than one per country.
On 10/09/2017 1:31 PM, Steve L wrote:
OH7LZB has shown a basic proof of concept, showing how to use a P12 Log of The World Digital Certificate to verify who you are. We just
I do agree, digital certificates are a promising way to go, but when I've looked into LOTW, the requirements for non US hams were a problem for me. It is not possible to authenticate an Australian licence these days, as paper licences are no longer issued (I haven't had one for 2 years), only the digital copy, which anyone can download is normally available. And I run a paperless office, so no printer (the overheads of maintaining one far exceed any usefulness).
So, we need something other than LOTW, which I can't use at this time (though accepting LOTW as a valid CA option does make sense).
i missed the original post
do we have ipv6 allocation for amprnet ? if so what is address space ? how the connection will be ? and what about conectivity to the ipv4 amprnet network ?
Ronen-4Z4ZQ
________________________________ From: 44Net 44net-bounces+ronenp=hotmail.com@hamradio.ucsd.edu on behalf of Brian Kantor Brian@UCSD.Edu Sent: Monday, September 4, 2017 12:08 AM To: AMPRNet working group Subject: Re: [44net] An anniversary of a sort - 36 years
On Mon, Sep 04, 2017 at 01:36:10AM -0500, Steve L wrote:
I guess the more pertinent questions I have for Brian would be:
Are there a plan so that folks who only have IPv6 commercial address or are suck behind carrier grade IPv4 with no firewall access (some cellular carriers presently) can participate with the amprnet? In other words are there plans to make amprgw dual stack?
(I think you meant 'stuck', not 'suck'. Is that a Freudian slip?)
There's no plan to make amprgw dual stack. I'm not sure that the question is meaningful; what would it DO with an incoming IPv6-only packet? It's not going to be a NAT64 gateway, that's for certain.
Interoperability of IPv4-only and IPv6-only hosts is a sticky wicket that in my opinion NO ONE has solved satisfactorily. - Brian _________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
Hello list,
I have been lurking for a while but this topic is something I have expertise in. Although I am a professional wireless guy, having installed more than a thousand wireless devices throughout the world, I am mainly a broker for the sale of IPv4 addresses.
As a broker I am intimately familiar with the market, the transition from IPv4 to IPv6, and the history of the Internet. Like many in the ham community, I am getting up there in years, I had an ARPANET account in 1978.
There are few sources of information in the IPv4 market, in particular there is no record of the price paid for each transaction. I have brokered 424 transfers since 2012, and I offer the information I have gleaned to this community. Hopefully it will assist the community in making appropriate choices going forward.
As to my bona fides, I am an MIT grad, I run a network of WiFi hotspots in about 80 cities, I have experience working with satellite communications, Mikrotik routers, UBNT wireless gear, and rural communications. I am the author of transfer policies in North America (ARIN) and South America (LACNIC). I have brokered transfers to over 60 countries.
The 44/8, as Mr. Kantor intimated, is the target of hungry brokers. This is because since the middle of 2016 there has been a dearth of sellers of large blocks of addresses (> 1 million) while there are many buyers looking for large blocks.
Having read the list for a while, it seems like what was a great idea 30 years ago has been overtaken by events, and FCC regulations require changes to allow ham technologies to develop usable networks. But it seems like the lobbying arm of the ham community has been unable to secure these changes.
And it also seems like regulatory changes might allow for a more modern approach which would be more exciting for newcomers and provide incentive for hacking around for solutions to some edge problems, such as those experienced by those living without cabled broadband in heavily wooded areas. We use 900Mhz for this but the lower UHF bands would be better. VHF better still.
I guess it would help to have funding to achieve these changes, whether to pay a more prominent lobbyist, or to develop a prototype device or application to support the change in regulation.
The 44/8 block is worth over $300 million today. As IPv6 becomes the dominant protocol, the 44/8 block will become valueless.
IPv4 addresses can be sold in blocks as small as /24 or 256 addresses. The 44 block contains 65,536 of these /24s.
A few on this list have started to make the hard decision that some of the old stuff laying in sheds and garages has become worthless due to the march of technology. The 44/8 block will likewise become another hunk of once-valuable junk, so unless the community wishes to enjoy again the bittersweet feeling of regarding that junk it would be advisable to consider engaging in some sales.
I have looked at the numbering scheme for the 44 block, and there seem to be relatively obvious ways to renumber into a more efficiently used system, freeing up large swathes of address space. Renumbering is a challenge that will stress the AMPR network, but we find that it leads to much more efficient use of address space and it provides an opportunity to re-evaluate current allocations to see if they are still in use.
So to the members of this list I offer my knowledge and expertise on this subject, and whatever I can offer in terms of Mikrotiks, BGP, tunneling, dual-stack, asymmetrical satellite, and wireless in the nGhz and 900Mhz bands.
Regards, Mike Burns
PS That information about the 44-related invention of CIDR was wonderful, I had no idea of its genesis. It's ironic that CIDR saved the IPv4 internet from exhaust 20 years ago.
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+mike=sum.net@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Steve L Sent: Monday, September 04, 2017 2:36 AM To: 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] An anniversary of a sort - 36 years
Bill, The best person to answer is Brian Kantor. Till he chimes in...
I don't expect to see IPv4 switched off on the general internet in my lifetime. The adoption rate of v6 is pretty sad. We don't even have everyone dual stacks yet.
There has been some casual discussions from foreign hams to try and get an IPv6 allocation for ham radio from RIPE ( I believe).. but there will be so many addresses available I am not even sure ham radio needs its own allocation.
Moving forward the whole online ham authentication thing (that OH7LZB has pointed out) makes more sense in my opinion. Use one of your many-many IPv6 addreses from your ISP, but add some sort of authentication to the process of interacting with other ham services. That is presently a lure of 44net.. knowing the guy on the other end is a ham, and whatever traffic is being generated (VOIP, data etc) should it key an actual transmitter it will be legit.
[There was a proposal in 1998 to encode a "call sign" into IPv6 address titled "Take the Next Step with the Next Generation Protocol" by Naoto Shimazaki. And in 2012 a few members from the Mesa Amateur Radio Club of Arizona took this to code.)
I guess the more pertinent questions I have for Brian would be:
Are there a plan so that folks who only have IPv6 commercial address or are suck behind carrier grade IPv4 with no firewall access (some cellular carriers presently) can participate with the amprnet? In other words are there plans to make amprgw dual stack?
73 Steve, KB9MWR
OM,
I'm a bit behind the times, so please bear with me. Is there a plan and schedule for ampr.net to convert to IPv6?
Is there a consensus on the conversion? We're a pretty small part of the
net, after all, and my first >reaction to thinking of IPv6 is "Do I have to?"
BTW, will ucsd be able to tunnel IPv4 44/8 addresses over IPv6?
As I said, I'm out of practice with networking, and I just realized that I
don't know if/when the ampr.net >will switchover, nor how it will affect the existing 44/8 allocations. Brian?
Thanks for your time.
73,
Bill, W4EWH
_________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
Hello Mike,
. . .The 44/8 block will likewise become another hunk of once-valuable junk, so unless the community wishes to enjoy again the bittersweet feeling of regarding that junk it would be advisable to consider engaging in some sales.
To what end? I believe we aren't here for the money. Even if we were to sell off a bunch of /16s, where would that money go since we're considered LEGACY? It wouldn't go back to Brian, or UCSD, any of us AMPR users, or even any HAMs. No, it would go to ARIN or some other bureaucratic part of the US government and just be absorbed in the "general plan". Poof!
I completely understand the value of IPv4 addresses due to their scarcity but I don't think that something we never paid for should be charged an extreme premium for ($17.88 per IP). Call me a fossil but it just rubs me the wrong way. My $0.02.
--David KI6ZHD
All,
Having personal experience with selling legacy IP space, the money would go to the corporation (ARDC) that owns the /8... not ARIN or the US Government.
That money could be used for whatever the corporation wanted.
I am not suggesting the sale just sharing based on experience.
73,
John L. Ricketts, PhD KI5D
On Sep 5, 2017, at 21:08, David Ranch amprgw@trinnet.net wrote:
Hello Mike,
. . .The 44/8 block will likewise become another hunk of once-valuable junk, so unless the community wishes to enjoy again the bittersweet feeling of regarding that junk it would be advisable to consider engaging in some sales.
To what end? I believe we aren't here for the money. Even if we were to sell off a bunch of /16s, where would that money go since we're considered LEGACY? It wouldn't go back to Brian, or UCSD, any of us AMPR users, or even any HAMs. No, it would go to ARIN or some other bureaucratic part of the US government and just be absorbed in the "general plan". Poof!
I completely understand the value of IPv4 addresses due to their scarcity but I don't think that something we never paid for should be charged an extreme premium for ($17.88 per IP). Call me a fossil but it just rubs me the wrong way. My $0.02.
--David KI6ZHD
On 9/5/2017 10:36 PM, John Ricketts wrote:
On Sep 5, 2017, at 21:08, David Ranch amprgw@trinnet.net wrote:
Hello Mike,
. . .The 44/8 block will likewise become another hunk of once-valuable junk, so unless the community wishes to enjoy again the bittersweet feeling of regarding that junk it would be advisable to consider engaging in some sales.
To what end? I believe we aren't here for the money. Even if we were to sell off a bunch of /16s, where would that money go since we're considered LEGACY? It wouldn't go back to Brian, or UCSD, any of us AMPR users, or even any HAMs. No, it would go to ARIN or some other bureaucratic part of the US government and just be absorbed in the "general plan". Poof!
I completely understand the value of IPv4 addresses due to their scarcity but I don't think that something we never paid for should be charged an extreme premium for ($17.88 per IP). Call me a fossil but it just rubs me the wrong way. My $0.02.
--David KI6ZHD
All,
Having personal experience with selling legacy IP space, the money would go to the corporation (ARDC) that owns the /8... not ARIN or the US Government.
That money could be used for whatever the corporation wanted.
I am not suggesting the sale just sharing based on experience.
I don't know who or what "owns" the ARDC, or what the legalities of selling it's primary asset would be, but ...
If the corporation could collect large amounts of money for the 44/8 assignment, I'd vote to take the cash and kiss 44/8 goodbye: the IPv4 space will become worthless within the next decade. If it's worth a significant amount of money right now, then now is the time to cash it in: we hams could continue to use 44/8, since ampr.net is probably the best definition of a "detached" network, or just change to RFC1918 addresses.
The money would give ARDC options for the future: if the amounts mentioned are obtainable, it would be possible to endow a trust fund that could assure ampr.net a future. Of course, the hardest part would be safeguarding the proceeds of a sale, but that's the same challenge that any lottery winner faces, and there's plenty of good advice and many capable people out there.
The ARDC *might* be in possession of a bag of magic beans. If that's the case, I vote to plant them.
73,
Bill, W4EWH
If we went down the path of selling off 44/8 (all or in part). I would suggest that it go into a trust fund that could provide grants for deploying networks (like HamWAN) and R&D for amateur specific hardware and software. (Possibly some scholarships as well.)
If, indeed, the market price for a /8 is $300m -- if we would get a modest 3% return on the trust fund, that's still nearly $9 million / year for amateur radio digital research, development, and deployment -- without touching the principle.
On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 9:34 PM, Bill Horne bill@horne.net wrote:
On 9/5/2017 10:36 PM, John Ricketts wrote:
On Sep 5, 2017, at 21:08, David Ranch amprgw@trinnet.net wrote:
Hello Mike,
. . .The 44/8 block will likewise become another hunk of
once-valuable junk, so unless the community wishes to enjoy again the bittersweet feeling of regarding that junk it would be advisable to consider engaging in some sales.
To what end? I believe we aren't here for the money. Even if we were to sell off a bunch of /16s, where would that money go since we're considered LEGACY? It wouldn't go back to Brian, or UCSD, any of us AMPR users, or even any HAMs. No, it would go to ARIN or some other bureaucratic part of the US government and just be absorbed in the "general plan". Poof!
I completely understand the value of IPv4 addresses due to their scarcity but I don't think that something we never paid for should be charged an extreme premium for ($17.88 per IP). Call me a fossil but it just rubs me the wrong way. My $0.02.
--David KI6ZHD
All,
Having personal experience with selling legacy IP space, the money would go to the corporation (ARDC) that owns the /8... not ARIN or the US Government.
That money could be used for whatever the corporation wanted.
I am not suggesting the sale just sharing based on experience.
I don't know who or what "owns" the ARDC, or what the legalities of selling it's primary asset would be, but ...
If the corporation could collect large amounts of money for the 44/8 assignment, I'd vote to take the cash and kiss 44/8 goodbye: the IPv4 space will become worthless within the next decade. If it's worth a significant amount of money right now, then now is the time to cash it in: we hams could continue to use 44/8, since ampr.net is probably the best definition of a "detached" network, or just change to RFC1918 addresses.
The money would give ARDC options for the future: if the amounts mentioned are obtainable, it would be possible to endow a trust fund that could assure ampr.net a future. Of course, the hardest part would be safeguarding the proceeds of a sale, but that's the same challenge that any lottery winner faces, and there's plenty of good advice and many capable people out there.
The ARDC *might* be in possession of a bag of magic beans. If that's the case, I vote to plant them.
73,
Bill, W4EWH
Why not sell off our frequency’s while we are at it too? I see 44/8 just like any other spectrum we have. 44/8 has just as much value as other spectrum we have access to as well from commercial ventures…
My self and others have been able to reclaim commercial v4 space from our ham projects and re-number into 44 space. We are also building much infrastructure on the 44 space. We are able to work connectivity and peering agreements with providers due to the fact we don’t need space from them. We have our own to use.
As for the V6 topic that got into this thread, there is so much space that groups can get there own space from a provider or tunnel broker. he.net http://he.net/ will give you a /48 last I checked. The groups that are serious about doing V6 with ham radio will figure it out or already have. HamWAN Tampa dual stacks already as does other groups. Here in Michigan we have a /36 ready to go, but it’s on the when snow is flying list of things todo vs now which is installing RF gear building networks in good weather. I do like the idea of an addon to the ampr portal that list the “Ham Based” v6 networks. like we have now for v4.
-- Fredric Moses - W8FSM - WQOG498 fred@moses.bz
IP allocations are obviously not the same type of resource as our frequency bands. But, even if they were, this would still be a worthwhile discussion to have. If we had the opportunity to trade-in a fraction of one of our seldom used bands in exchange for much more room in one of the crowed bands, wouldn't that be a worthwhile discussion to have for the betterment of amateur radio and it's long term growth?
As both the holder of 44net's largest end-user allocation, and a long time advocate for experimental networking, I'm very well aware of how valuable having this allocation is to our community. However, both our utilization and our efficiency in its utilization are abysmal and nowhere near the standards we hold ourselves to for our RF resources. By making efficiency improvements in the way we allocate space, we may end up determining that 44/9 (half of our current space) may still be orders of magnitude more than our peak usage will ever be between now and the time when IPv4 space falls out of favor.
Getting this community to agree on anything can be worse than pulling teeth. ;) So, rather than talking about money or "selling" our valuable resources, I think it would be helpful if we focused the discussion on what resources we would consider valuable enough to trade a small piece of our space for. In the end, we may decide that nothing is worth it, but I think that this would be the best way to figure it out.
First of all, since we already have a global amateur radio registry for IPv4 space, I think a large block of IPv6 space would be a worthwhile trade for a small piece of 44/8. The current version of AMPRnet may not ever support IPv6, but if it made any sense at all to get us a /8 in the early 80s to support the future of amateur radio innovation, then we should have done the same for IPv6 well over a decade ago.
Personally, I've always wondered how we missed the boat on getting a top-level domain name in the early days of DNS. Getting our own TLD makes a lot of sense since our call signs are already a globally unique namespace we could use with it. DNS is only meant to make addresses easier to remember, but by standardizing our namespace in a TLD, we would also have the advantage of a global directory that makes the services you want to make public easily discoverable. I can see such a thing becoming very valuable to our community in the future as amateur radio continues to merge with the digital world. If we had setup a registry to handle it, that technical advantage may have granted us a TLD in the early days. But now that they've changed the rules for TLDs, it would almost certainly require more resources than a group of hams could manage. However, if the concept is valuable enough to us, it may be worth taking advantage of an opportunity to trade a small part of our unused IPv4 space for it.
Cory Johnson, NQ1E HamWAN Puget Sound
I attempted to get one. It was turned down by the NIC folks; they said that the basic group of COM MIL ORG EDU NET INT was sufficient for all time.
So I tried to get one in .INT - hamradio.int, I think it was. That was in progress for some time and then basically got shoved behind somebody's desk and I could never get any reply to inquiries about it, so we didn't get that one either. We finally went with AMPR.ORG as that was achievable.
You could probably get .HAM now. I believe now all it takes is money. - Brian
On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 12:14:54PM -0700, Cory (NQ1E) wrote:
Personally, I've always wondered how we missed the boat on getting a top-level domain name in the early days of DNS. Getting our own TLD makes a lot of sense since our call signs are already a globally unique namespace we could use with it. DNS is only meant to make addresses easier to remember, but by standardizing our namespace in a TLD, we would also have the advantage of a global directory that makes the services you want to make public easily discoverable. I can see such a thing becoming very valuable to our community in the future as amateur radio continues to merge with the digital world. If we had setup a registry to handle it, that technical advantage may have granted us a TLD in the early days. But now that they've changed the rules for TLDs, it would almost certainly require more resources than a group of hams could manage. However, if the concept is valuable enough to us, it may be worth taking advantage of an opportunity to trade a small part of our unused IPv4 space for it.
Cory Johnson, NQ1E HamWAN Puget Sound
On 7/09/2017 5:33 AM, Brian Kantor wrote:
You could probably get .HAM now. I believe now all it takes is money.
- Brian
I'm sure you're right. AFAIK, there are very few restrictions on what TLDs can be created these days, if you have the money to hand over.
On Sep 11, 2017, at 03:32, Tony Langdon vk3jed@vkradio.com wrote:
On 7/09/2017 5:33 AM, Brian Kantor wrote:
You could probably get .HAM now. I believe now all it takes is money.
- Brian
I'm sure you're right. AFAIK, there are very few restrictions on what TLDs can be created these days, if you have the money to hand over.
$185,000 last I heard. Plus you have to wait for the next window of registration.
"opportunity to trade a small part of our unused IPv4 space for it."
My opinion on the subject
We should NOT give any of our network no matter how much money we will be offered exactly as we do NOT do for our RF spectrum
Here in europe we gave up (gave up is not the correct words the correct words are no one ask us ) on a part of the 433 MHZ band and now when i open my SDR here i see a garbage come from all alarms Door openers weather stations etc and other Junk radios polluting our band sitting exactly on the middle of our UHF band ... i dont want same happen to my (our) 44 net
im not in the IPv6 business i used to be in the networking team of the first ISP company in my country , that time it was only ipv4 but i understand that we can get (buy) ? enough IPv6 address space for the whole the hamnet community in reasonable price and i even think we will be able to get it free with the correct Public Relation ... if thats the truth why trading ? lets buy if money involved in buying im sure we all be happy to donate in order to buy
trade is only option for something that money can NOT buy .
I hope no one will do something stupid that in time we all cry on it im totally confidence in our good friend Brian he will keep our network safe from peoples that want to make benefit from our valuable resources that one of it is our current address space
Regards
Ronen-4Z4ZQ
Ronen Pinchooks (4Z4ZQ) WebSitehttp://www.ronen.org/ www.ronen.org ronen.org (Ronen Pinchooks (4Z4ZQ) WebSite) is hosted by domainavenue.com
________________________________
opportunity to trade a small part of our unused IPv4 space for it.
On Sep 6, 2017, at 12:52 PM, R P ronenp@hotmail.com wrote:
"opportunity to trade a small part of our unused IPv4 space for it."
Okay, this brings up an interesting topic. Does anyone actually ‘own’ 44/8 ? It was allocated long before entities like ARIN ever existed. I know there’s a ORG record in WHOIS for it - an organization called “Amateur Radio Digital Communications”. Is this entity registered in some capacity (company, non profit, etc?) And has this entity entered into a LRSA or RSA with ARIN?
Ian VE7BST
Amateur Radio Digital Communications (ARDC) is a California non-profit corporation with 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status in the USA. ARIN recognizes it as the legacy owner of AMPRNet.
We were smart enough NOT to enter any LRSA or RSA agreement with ARIN and thus we have preserved our legacy ownership rights. - Brian
On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 01:04:51PM -0700, Ian McLaughlin wrote:
Okay, this brings up an interesting topic. Does anyone actually ‘own’ 44/8 ? It was allocated long before entities like ARIN ever existed. I know there’s a ORG record in WHOIS for it - an organization called “Amateur Radio Digital Communications”. Is this entity registered in some capacity (company, non profit, etc?) And has this entity entered into a LRSA or RSA with ARIN?
Ian VE7BST
On Sep 6, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Brian Kantor Brian@UCSD.Edu wrote:
We were smart enough NOT to enter any LRSA or RSA agreement with ARIN and thus we have preserved our legacy ownership rights.
- Brian
I am happy to see this :)
Ian VE7BST
The similarities and differences I see:
The IP allocation like frequencies were granted to us, and we did not pay for them. They are both regulated as they both are basically finite resources.
However the present IP allocation unlike frequencies will at some point in the future become worthless and unuseable to us.
If we were to consider trading a small piece of our network space;
-I am sure Marius' daemon could be modified to black hole the network pieces we'd potential sell off, thus keeping the network secure to hams only etc.
-There would be a heck of a lot of work for the ARDC a head of them acting as stewards of the proceeds etc.
As for the potential proceeds;
-Lobbying. While I despise it in general, I do see our outdated rules as the biggest/first hurdle.
-I'd say R&D sounds good. However TAPR does theoretically already provide monetary support to people/groups with potential projects. I don't really pay attention to the details of these actions so I don't know how often someone with a good idea goes to TAPR requesting monetary help though. Still boils down to willing and able R&D people.
-Scholarships to engineering students. The youth is the future. (And while I'd love as much as anyone else to see Phil Karn on this list, I am glad he is still active at this most fundamental level- at least in a non-monetary level)
-Attempt to obtain some IPv6 space. While I feel we'd likely be in the same boat as now with it, not being able to route it, if we can get some space at a decent price (one time fee etc), it might not be a bad idea. But I have to say I think we can still do a lot without IPv6 space.
So those are my thoughts
Steve, KB9MWR
Getting this community to agree on anything can be worse than pulling teeth. ;) So, rather than talking about money or "selling" our valuable resources, I think it would be helpful if we focused the discussion on what resources we would consider valuable enough to trade a small piece of our space for. In the end, we may decide that nothing is worth it, but I think that this would be the best way to figure it out.
First of all, since we already have a global amateur radio registry for IPv4 space, I think a large block of IPv6 space would be a worthwhile trade for a small piece of 44/8. The current version of AMPRnet may not ever support IPv6, but if it made any sense at all to get us a /8 in the early 80s to support the future of amateur radio innovation, then we should have done the same for IPv6 well over a decade ago.
Personally, I've always wondered how we missed the boat on getting a top-level domain name in the early days of DNS. Getting our own TLD makes a lot of sense since our call signs are already a globally unique namespace we could use with it. DNS is only meant to make addresses easier to remember, but by standardizing our namespace in a TLD, we would also have the advantage of a global directory that makes the services you want to make public easily discoverable. I can see such a thing becoming very valuable to our community in the future as amateur radio continues to merge with the digital world. If we had setup a registry to handle it, that technical advantage may have granted us a TLD in the early days. But now that they've changed the rules for TLDs, it would almost certainly require more resources than a group of hams could manage. However, if the concept is valuable enough to us, it may be worth taking advantage of an opportunity to trade a small part of our unused IPv4 space for it.
Cory Johnson, NQ1E HamWAN Puget Sound
Hi there,
I wouldn’t sell anything at any price... at least not yet. Nobody has clear in the networking scene what should be happening next with the IPv4-to-IPv6 transition and who should be doing this transition (carriers, telcos and/or end-users). Not having clear if both IP schemes will coexist for a while, or forever, makes me think we shouldn’t get rid of any resource that we can use, and can trade with, if necessary, later on.
The person that officially (or not officially) managed to get the 44/8 in the early Internet times did a quite impressive job, not by filling forms in order to get the address space assigned to ham radio colective but thinking beyond the box (not only out of it), doing prospective, venturing a bunch of possible futures to see where we, the hams, would be using that new thing named "the IPv4 address space" for something quite new related to, let’s say to resume basics on AX.25, and other future related uses, and managed to get a today's expensive resource for free, so so. If you’re yet thinking what we should be doing now in terms of IPv6, OK, no offense but I think you didn't understand the situation where we currently are. What we should be doing next is that mental exercise that guy did years ago again of thinking beyond the box, doing prospective and venturing what and where we want to be in the coming future. By the way, a future we are not going to live to see in most cases.
I think about this every day, specially when I do play with my daughter and with the radios I have, with love, at home, and every move I do I'm always considering that we should do again this movement the sooner the better in order to bring back again some glory and respect to our community.
The endeavor we are facing isn't an easy task, we all know that, and, just in case anyone doubts it yet, we lack resources we had in the past. The number of hams decrease little by little and we are not handling correctly the generational changeover, as it is evident.
It’s not an easy task neither because (not mostly old) today's purists see ham radio as only watts, HF and contesting. Again, no offense, I'm just stating a fact. We lack resources because every year we are less than the year before; our hobby is not of interest for youngsters if we keep on focussing in our likes and not the theirs. Beside that fact, we are not managing to get the old ham radio glories to teach everything they learnt during their entire lives to youngsters that can continue in our hobby what those glories started from where they almost left it. No offense colleagues, but, Are we doing anything the right way today? Is that the surfeit that we cannot do anything better than thinking short-term, again, thinking in our own benefit?
I try to foresee that youngsters’ future and don’t see HF but Microwaves and, why not, other non-Ionosferic based communications. This for us might seem like a Sci-Fi movie but for them might be an accurate and realistic version of their today. We should be doing this effort to plan for them, to get resources for them, to manage to get the necessary steps in our community to get to where they should be in the future….but today.
What does is means in short? Don’t waste time thinking in short-term and let’s play big and let’s think long-term. What Research and Development are we aimed to do to become our community great again? That question is what IARU, ARRL, AMPR, AMSAT and the like should be working on today. If we cannot manage to get a proper answer in short we are heading to dissapear in the next generation, where IPv4, IPv6 and the ham radio spectre become something useless without ham operators.
My 2 cents. Best regards,
-- Vy73 de EA1HET, Jonathan
El 8 sept 2017, a las 20:41, Steve L kb9mwr@gmail.com escribió:
The similarities and differences I see:
The IP allocation like frequencies were granted to us, and we did not pay for them. They are both regulated as they both are basically finite resources.
However the present IP allocation unlike frequencies will at some point in the future become worthless and unuseable to us.
If we were to consider trading a small piece of our network space;
-I am sure Marius' daemon could be modified to black hole the network pieces we'd potential sell off, thus keeping the network secure to hams only etc.
-There would be a heck of a lot of work for the ARDC a head of them acting as stewards of the proceeds etc.
As for the potential proceeds;
-Lobbying. While I despise it in general, I do see our outdated rules as the biggest/first hurdle.
-I'd say R&D sounds good. However TAPR does theoretically already provide monetary support to people/groups with potential projects. I don't really pay attention to the details of these actions so I don't know how often someone with a good idea goes to TAPR requesting monetary help though. Still boils down to willing and able R&D people.
-Scholarships to engineering students. The youth is the future. (And while I'd love as much as anyone else to see Phil Karn on this list, I am glad he is still active at this most fundamental level- at least in a non-monetary level)
-Attempt to obtain some IPv6 space. While I feel we'd likely be in the same boat as now with it, not being able to route it, if we can get some space at a decent price (one time fee etc), it might not be a bad idea. But I have to say I think we can still do a lot without IPv6 space.
So those are my thoughts
Steve, KB9MWR
Getting this community to agree on anything can be worse than pulling teeth. ;) So, rather than talking about money or "selling" our valuable resources, I think it would be helpful if we focused the discussion on what resources we would consider valuable enough to trade a small piece of our space for. In the end, we may decide that nothing is worth it, but I think that this would be the best way to figure it out.
First of all, since we already have a global amateur radio registry for IPv4 space, I think a large block of IPv6 space would be a worthwhile trade for a small piece of 44/8. The current version of AMPRnet may not ever support IPv6, but if it made any sense at all to get us a /8 in the early 80s to support the future of amateur radio innovation, then we should have done the same for IPv6 well over a decade ago.
Personally, I've always wondered how we missed the boat on getting a top-level domain name in the early days of DNS. Getting our own TLD makes a lot of sense since our call signs are already a globally unique namespace we could use with it. DNS is only meant to make addresses easier to remember, but by standardizing our namespace in a TLD, we would also have the advantage of a global directory that makes the services you want to make public easily discoverable. I can see such a thing becoming very valuable to our community in the future as amateur radio continues to merge with the digital world. If we had setup a registry to handle it, that technical advantage may have granted us a TLD in the early days. But now that they've changed the rules for TLDs, it would almost certainly require more resources than a group of hams could manage. However, if the concept is valuable enough to us, it may be worth taking advantage of an opportunity to trade a small part of our unused IPv4 space for it.
Cory Johnson, NQ1E HamWAN Puget Sound
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
On 9/8/17 2:41 PM, Steve L wrote:
If we were to consider trading a small piece of our network space;
Well that's the thing, it needs to be we. As of now ARDC is a non-profit with four directors who run it all. There is no representation of the community in selecting these directors and no provision for general membership.
Before any decisions regarding this is made, this would need to be fixed and have buy in from the community members.
As it stands now there three non-ham directors could vote to transfer it and it would be legal with the bylaws of ARDC.
I don't think this would happen, but from the perspective of representative organizations in amateur radio it's important to appear on the level. I have seen this with the Repeater Council here in Florida. We're working on rewriting the bylaws now to prevent such problems and fairly represent the members.
-There would be a heck of a lot of work for the ARDC a head of them acting as stewards of the proceeds etc.
The Technical Advisory Committee is certainly willing to get involved, but I don't see much that ARDC needs to do different.
My view of ARDC is a RIR for amateur radio use. We could give out IPv6, IPv4, and ASN's for ham radio, and facilitate the discussion of new technologies. Nothing would preclude ARDC from leasing/selling space, but it would need to be well thought out. Scholarships are a good idea, but an endowment to enable grants to those doing development of technology benefiting amateur radio digital communications would be cool too.
Perhaps that is the question, what is the ideal function of ARDC?
73's
Hi David,
You are correct to ask that question. To what end?
First, there is the consideration of the health of the Internet as a whole. This is an era when IPv4 is necessary for Internet connectivity to the whole Internet, yet IPv4 is exhausted and those who need IPv4 addresses to grow the Internet are thwarted by exhaust. Many are latecomers in developing regions of the world. In this era, and in a stake-holder governed entity like the Internet, we should consider the ethics of withholding valuable assets from those who need them, while watching those assets decay to nothingness.
Second there is the important question of where the money goes, and you are correct to say it would not go to Brian or any AMPR users, or even the ham community. It would definitely NOT go to ARIN, or to the government, and the legacy status is completely immaterial to this issue.
I do not know how AMPR is organized, but I imagine the articles of incorporation would provide limitations on removing wealth from the organization in any fashion. But I tried to identify, in my previous email, some things that the community might see as valuable, such as paying for a K-Street lobbying firm to look in to FCC regulation changes which could benefit the ham community or funding an application or device prototype which would be helpful in demonstrating the need for changes in regulation.
It might be allowable for AMPR to donate to charitable organizations, I don't know. But perhaps there is some organization or event like the Boy Scout Jamboree of the Air that could be subsidized so as to encourage new entrants to the ham radio hobby.
Maybe this is an opportunity for the organization to do something visionary or to transition in some way towards newer technologies or different technologies. Probably this community has plenty of creative hackers who could find something productive to do with a quarter billion dollars.
Or the opportunity could simply fade away, like the value of the 44 block. I think it's something the community should decide upon, but at this point, although IPv4 address values are at their historic peak, I believe they have not stopped rising in value, so my guess is that the right time to sell might be approaching, perhaps a year away.
Some sellers with large blocks piece them out, as it is possible to sell part of a block, down to sizes of /24 which sell for roughly $4,100 each. So it is also possible to engineer a stream of income through a series of small block sales if that is more desirable to the organization.
These are decisions for your community-at-large and your board in particular, so I thought it best for the community to hash it out on the mailing list to provide guidance to board members.
I understand the queasy feeling of selling something that you got for free as sort of a public resource. The public IPv4 market is over six years old now, and some of the largest firms in the world are market participants. And also some of the newest and smallest. There have been over 5,000 sales of IPv4 blocks to date, and the market is growing. The decisions made by every address registry's community (ARIN, RIPE, et al) were that the benefits of using the profit incentive to bring unused addresses into productive use was worth any queasiness over the sense of unfair enrichment to those early adopters who acquired large blocks.
Brian has indicated that the board is aware of the issue and considers it frequently, but the board benefits from feedback and comments from the community, so thank you David, for yours.
Regards, Mike
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+mike=sum.net@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of David Ranch Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 10:14 PM To: AMPRNet working group 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] An anniversary of a sort - 36 years
Hello Mike,
. . .The 44/8 block will likewise become another hunk of once-valuable junk, so unless the community wishes to enjoy again the bittersweet feeling of regarding that junk it would be advisable to consider engaging in some sales.
To what end? I believe we aren't here for the money. Even if we were to sell off a bunch of /16s, where would that money go since we're considered LEGACY? It wouldn't go back to Brian, or UCSD, any of us AMPR users, or even any HAMs. No, it would go to ARIN or some other bureaucratic part of the US government and just be absorbed in the "general plan". Poof!
I completely understand the value of IPv4 addresses due to their scarcity but I don't think that something we never paid for should be charged an extreme premium for ($17.88 per IP). Call me a fossil but it just rubs me the wrong way. My $0.02.
--David KI6ZHD
Mike,
I was wondering if you are a current amateur radio operator? I noticed you didn’t mention anything related to that in your last email before this and a quick search didn’t come up with anything for a Mike Burns…. This list according to the description for amprnet users and gateway operators for discussion of all things AMPRnet related.. While not a private list just like to know who is offering suggestions. As the tone of your mails has pretty much been that of somebody trying to work free some space to sell and not that of an amateur radio operator who uses the asset in question.
-- Fredric Moses - W8FSM - WQOG498 fred@moses.bz
On Sep 6, 2017, at 09:56, Mike Burns mike@sum.net wrote:
Hi David,
You are correct to ask that question. To what end?
First, there is the consideration of the health of the Internet as a whole. This is an era when IPv4 is necessary for Internet connectivity to the whole Internet, yet IPv4 is exhausted and those who need IPv4 addresses to grow the Internet are thwarted by exhaust. Many are latecomers in developing regions of the world. In this era, and in a stake-holder governed entity like the Internet, we should consider the ethics of withholding valuable assets from those who need them, while watching those assets decay to nothingness.
Second there is the important question of where the money goes, and you are correct to say it would not go to Brian or any AMPR users, or even the ham community. It would definitely NOT go to ARIN, or to the government, and the legacy status is completely immaterial to this issue.
I do not know how AMPR is organized, but I imagine the articles of incorporation would provide limitations on removing wealth from the organization in any fashion. But I tried to identify, in my previous email, some things that the community might see as valuable, such as paying for a K-Street lobbying firm to look in to FCC regulation changes which could benefit the ham community or funding an application or device prototype which would be helpful in demonstrating the need for changes in regulation.
It might be allowable for AMPR to donate to charitable organizations, I don't know. But perhaps there is some organization or event like the Boy Scout Jamboree of the Air that could be subsidized so as to encourage new entrants to the ham radio hobby.
Maybe this is an opportunity for the organization to do something visionary or to transition in some way towards newer technologies or different technologies. Probably this community has plenty of creative hackers who could find something productive to do with a quarter billion dollars.
Or the opportunity could simply fade away, like the value of the 44 block. I think it's something the community should decide upon, but at this point, although IPv4 address values are at their historic peak, I believe they have not stopped rising in value, so my guess is that the right time to sell might be approaching, perhaps a year away.
Some sellers with large blocks piece them out, as it is possible to sell part of a block, down to sizes of /24 which sell for roughly $4,100 each. So it is also possible to engineer a stream of income through a series of small block sales if that is more desirable to the organization.
These are decisions for your community-at-large and your board in particular, so I thought it best for the community to hash it out on the mailing list to provide guidance to board members.
I understand the queasy feeling of selling something that you got for free as sort of a public resource. The public IPv4 market is over six years old now, and some of the largest firms in the world are market participants. And also some of the newest and smallest. There have been over 5,000 sales of IPv4 blocks to date, and the market is growing. The decisions made by every address registry's community (ARIN, RIPE, et al) were that the benefits of using the profit incentive to bring unused addresses into productive use was worth any queasiness over the sense of unfair enrichment to those early adopters who acquired large blocks.
Brian has indicated that the board is aware of the issue and considers it frequently, but the board benefits from feedback and comments from the community, so thank you David, for yours.
Regards, Mike
Hi Frederic,
No, I am not an amateur radio operator. I do have extensive 30+ years experience in networking and I am a professional wireless guy. I have a deployed network of 80 Mikrotik routers around the country which use tunnels and routing techniques similar to AMPRNet. I have deployed asymmetrical networks with dialup/Satellite and also several C-band and K-band earthstations. I am a tower climber and installer with over a 1000 installations to my credit. And I have expertise in the IPv4 market.
My hope is that I can provide honest information to the community that will inure to my benefit when and if the board chooses a broker to help with any sales. I am an IPv4 broker and I am not trying to hide or disguise that fact, or my motivations. It's a quid pro quo. I have information that is hard to acquire in the opaque IPv4 market and my intention is to share that with you so that the community is informed on this issue, which is not really ham-related.
I have not posted my organization name nor contact information and I have made my sales pitch. I will provide information without obligation as the best way I can think of to differentiate myself from other brokers. I will chime in to answer questions or provide information that I think is valuable to the community unless the mailing list is inappropriate for this. If it is inappropriate I will stop.
It is understandable that a search for Mike Burns yields little value, since there are so many Mike Burnses! I am happy to share more information about my background or the name of my company but I thought that might be too sales-y. If it's allowed I will happily provide that information so that you can review my experience.
Regards, MikeMike,
I was wondering if you are a current amateur radio operator? I noticed you didn’t mention anything related to that in your last email before this and a quick search didn’t come up with anything for a Mike Burns…. This list according to the description for amprnet users and gateway operators for discussion of all things AMPRnet related.. While not a private list just like to know who is offering suggestions. As the tone of your mails has pretty much been that of somebody trying to work free some space to sell and not that of an amateur radio operator who uses the asset in question.
-- Fredric Moses - W8FSM - WQOG498 fred@moses.bz
On Sep 6, 2017, at 09:56, Mike Burns mike@sum.net wrote:
Hi David,
You are correct to ask that question. To what end?
First, there is the consideration of the health of the Internet as a whole. This is an era when IPv4 is necessary for Internet connectivity to the whole Internet, yet IPv4 is exhausted and those who need IPv4 addresses to grow the Internet are thwarted by exhaust. Many are latecomers in developing regions of the world. In this era, and in a stake-holder governed entity like the Internet, we should consider the ethics of withholding valuable assets from those who need them, while watching those assets decay to nothingness.
Second there is the important question of where the money goes, and you are correct to say it would not go to Brian or any AMPR users, or even the ham community. It would definitely NOT go to ARIN, or to the government, and the legacy status is completely immaterial to this issue.
I do not know how AMPR is organized, but I imagine the articles of incorporation would provide limitations on removing wealth from the organization in any fashion. But I tried to identify, in my previous email, some things that the community might see as valuable, such as paying for a K-Street lobbying firm to look in to FCC regulation changes which could benefit the ham community or funding an application or device prototype which would be helpful in demonstrating the need for changes in regulation.
It might be allowable for AMPR to donate to charitable organizations, I don't know. But perhaps there is some organization or event like the Boy Scout Jamboree of the Air that could be subsidized so as to encourage new entrants to the ham radio hobby.
Maybe this is an opportunity for the organization to do something visionary or to transition in some way towards newer technologies or different technologies. Probably this community has plenty of creative hackers who could find something productive to do with a quarter billion dollars.
Or the opportunity could simply fade away, like the value of the 44 block. I think it's something the community should decide upon, but at this point, although IPv4 address values are at their historic peak, I believe they have not stopped rising in value, so my guess is that the right time to sell might be approaching, perhaps a year away.
Some sellers with large blocks piece them out, as it is possible to sell part of a block, down to sizes of /24 which sell for roughly $4,100 each. So it is also possible to engineer a stream of income through a series of small block sales if that is more desirable to the organization.
These are decisions for your community-at-large and your board in particular, so I thought it best for the community to hash it out on the mailing list to provide guidance to board members.
I understand the queasy feeling of selling something that you got for free as sort of a public resource. The public IPv4 market is over six years old now, and some of the largest firms in the world are market participants. And also some of the newest and smallest. There have been over 5,000 sales of IPv4 blocks to date, and the market is growing. The decisions made by every address registry's community (ARIN, RIPE, et al) were that the benefits of using the profit incentive to bring unused addresses into productive use was worth any queasiness over the sense of unfair enrichment to those early adopters who acquired large blocks.
Brian has indicated that the board is aware of the issue and considers it frequently, but the board benefits from feedback and comments from the community, so thank you David, for yours.
Regards, Mike
Emotions seem to be running a little high on this subject so perhaps it's time to give it a rest.
Please remember that this mailing list is primarily for technical discussions of implementing amateur radio networking, tcp/ip specifically. - Brian
In fairness, that was true of IPv4 when we got 44net.
I for one would be in favour of us having an IPv6 allocation. Not all ISPs that support IPv6 give /64 subnets, so not all users of IPv6 get the advantages that it's supposed to provide.
Jim VE5EIS
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+jim=photojim.ca@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Steve L Sent: Monday, September 4, 2017 12:36 AM To: 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] An anniversary of a sort - 36 years
There has been some casual discussions from foreign hams to try and get an IPv6 allocation for ham radio from RIPE ( I believe).. but there will be so many addresses available I am not even sure ham radio needs its own allocation.
I think you meant /48’s or at least a /63 -- a /64 is meant to be the smallest subnet -- it is not meant to be sub-divided any further. Because some ISPs are allocating /64’s to their customers, I also think a ham-radio allocation would be good.
-- Scott -- WA6BLF
On Sep 5, 2017, at 4:03 PM, Jim MacKenzie jim@photojim.ca wrote:
In fairness, that was true of IPv4 when we got 44net.
I for one would be in favour of us having an IPv6 allocation. Not all ISPs that support IPv6 give /64 subnets, so not all users of IPv6 get the advantages that it's supposed to provide.
Jim VE5EIS
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+jim=photojim.ca@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Steve L Sent: Monday, September 4, 2017 12:36 AM To: 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] An anniversary of a sort - 36 years
There has been some casual discussions from foreign hams to try and get an IPv6 allocation for ham radio from RIPE ( I believe).. but there will be so many addresses available I am not even sure ham radio needs its own allocation.
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
AMPRNet could probably get a /40 or /36 from ARIN based on the number of sites:
Number of Sites IPv6 Block Size 1 /48 2 - 12 /44 13 - 192 /40 193 - 3,072 /36 3,073 - 49,152 /32
These are all extremely large blocks which would probably last AMPRNet forever. https://www.arin.net/resources/first_ipv6_request.html
Regards, Mike
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+mike=sum.net@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Scott Nelson Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2017 5:20 PM To: AMPRNet working group 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] An anniversary of a sort - 36 years
I think you meant /48’s or at least a /63 -- a /64 is meant to be the smallest subnet -- it is not meant to be sub-divided any further. Because some ISPs are allocating /64’s to their customers, I also think a ham-radio allocation would be good.
-- Scott -- WA6BLF
On Sep 5, 2017, at 4:03 PM, Jim MacKenzie jim@photojim.ca wrote:
In fairness, that was true of IPv4 when we got 44net.
I for one would be in favour of us having an IPv6 allocation. Not all ISPs that support IPv6 give /64 subnets, so not all users of IPv6 get the advantages that it's supposed to provide.
Jim VE5EIS
-----Original Message----- From: 44Net [mailto:44net-bounces+jim=photojim.ca@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Steve L Sent: Monday, September 4, 2017 12:36 AM To: 44net@hamradio.ucsd.edu Subject: Re: [44net] An anniversary of a sort - 36 years
There has been some casual discussions from foreign hams to try and get an IPv6 allocation for ham radio from RIPE ( I believe).. but there will be so many addresses available I am not even sure ham radio needs its own allocation.
44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
_________________________________________ 44Net mailing list 44Net@hamradio.ucsd.edu http://hamradio.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/44net
-
Bill Horne -
Brian Kantor -
Bryan Fields -
Cory (NQ1E) -
David Ranch -
Fredric Moses -
Ian McLaughlin -
James Sharp -
Jim MacKenzie -
John Ricketts -
Jonathan Gonzalez - EA1HET -
K7VE - John -
Mike Burns -
Patrick Ryan KC6VVT -
R P -
Richard Chycoski -
Scott Nelson -
Steve L -
Tom Cardinal -
Tony Langdon