2degrees: Changes to IP Addresses (CGNAT)

Forums › 2degrees (including Slingshot, Orcon, Flip, Stuff Fibre, MyRepublic, 2talk and Vocus) › 2degrees: Changes to IP Addresses (CGNAT)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | ... | 32

1594 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 485

Trusted

Net Trust Ltd

#2305528 24-Aug-2019 22:38

PolicyGuy:

There is actually a massive amount of unused IPv4 address space out there, but the people who hold it either don't know that they have it, don't know it has a market value (~$US10 / address last time I looked), or can't be bothered to do anything about it.

I recall two previous employers who obtained "legacy" IPv4 address space - i.e. from Waikato University before APNIC ever existed - which is largely or completely unused. One has three /24's of which they advertise IIRC three actual addresses, so that have 2 & 15/16ths which could be sold, and the other has a /19 as well as a substantial APNIC-issued block, the /19 is completely unused and probably nobody there now has any knowledge of it.

I'm sure that there are many other organisations who obtained legacy IPv4 addresses, then changed over internally to RFC1918 addressing but never relinquished their now-unused IPv4, then merged / got taken over and the institutional knowledge vanished. Since APNIC doesn't know about this allocation, they don't get any bills for it, so have no way to know about it and no incentive to do anything about it.

Just because the space exists does not mean its easy or possible to gain formal "custodianship"* of it. APNIC requires a chain of proof all the way from whoever's name is on it all the way to the current entity. Often, this is not possible.

US$10 per IP address sounds like a bargain. US$19 - $24 (depending on block size) is more in the ballpark.

You can't sell or route part blocks. The minimum globally routable block is a /24 for IPv4 and a /48 for IPv6. We do not (externally) BGP-advertise, nor allow our clients to advertise through us to any of our peers, any IP address blocks smaller than this. Put another way, all BGP route advertisments have to be at the boundary - ie: /24, /23, /22 etc for IPv4 or /48, /47, /46 etc for IPv6.

*The term APNIC uses - basically means leasee.

We offer all our clients static public IPv4 addresses and IPv6 addresses - typically a /56 or /48.

WFH Linux Systems and Networks Engineer in the Internet industry | Specialising in Mikrotik | APNIC member | Open to job offers | ZL2NET

Tinkerisk

4800 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3660

#2305530 24-Aug-2019 22:48

PolicyGuy:

Ah, the Good Ole Days!

It seems like you know the BOFH personally very well. ;-)

Qui nihil scit, omnia credere debet.
Firewalls do NOT stop dragons.
In effect we have everything to hide from someone, and no idea who someone is.

kiwibob1

109 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 34

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2305592 25-Aug-2019 09:04

PolicyGuy:

I'm sure that there are many other organisations who obtained legacy IPv4 addresses, then changed over internally to RFC1918 addressing but never relinquished their now-unused IPv4, then merged / got taken over and the institutional knowledge vanished. Since APNIC doesn't know about this allocation, they don't get any bills for it, so have no way to know about it and no incentive to do anything about it.

Back in the day we called this morass of addresses "The Swamp". If they could be identified and reallocated it would only be a temporary reprieve and probably a greater effort than migrating to IPv6.

Perhaps the greater sin is the large corporates like Ford and The Prudential sitting on their /8 blocks.

There's a great analysis of the IPv4 address space by Geoff Huston here https://ipv4.potaroo.net/.

evilonenz

/dev/urandom
291 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 152

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2305784 25-Aug-2019 17:43

I ended up contacting support via their website, and asked for the plans in regards to either opting out, or whether they would offer reduced or free Static IPs, and they have provided me with a free of charge static IPv4 address. Doesn't include a static IPv6 prefix, but thats no major. Glad my external services will continue without issue now.

Smokeping

Referral Links:

Quic - Use code R536299EPGOCN at checkout for free setup
Contact Energy - Use code FRTQDXB for $100 credit

unsignedint

69 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 28

#2306172 26-Aug-2019 14:09

evilonenz:

I ended up contacting support via their website, and asked for the plans in regards to either opting out, or whether they would offer reduced or free Static IPs, and they have provided me with a free of charge static IPv4 address. Doesn't include a static IPv6 prefix, but thats no major. Glad my external services will continue without issue now.

Thanks for the info. I will email them! :)

alasta

6891 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3365

Trusted

Subscriber

#2306184 26-Aug-2019 14:25

A couple of questions from a dumb non-technical user;

Firstly, it says that CGNAT will not support remote access to network storage devices, security cameras and, I assume, products like Philips Hue. It seems to be that this will affect a lot of people who don't consider themselves techies?

Secondly, if IPv6 is the solution then don't ISPs put move everyone across to it instead of using CGNAT? Is there there some of roadblock or complication with migrating people over to it?

Dell

Shop now for Dell laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

MichaelNZ

1594 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 485

Trusted

Net Trust Ltd

#2306186 26-Aug-2019 14:27

alasta:

Secondly, if IPv6 is the solution then don't ISPs put move everyone across to it instead of using CGNAT? Is there there some of roadblock or complication with migrating people over to it?

Because most users don't care and don't understand so there isn't much incentive for ISP's.

Not talking for myself here. We support IPv6.

WFH Linux Systems and Networks Engineer in the Internet industry | Specialising in Mikrotik | APNIC member | Open to job offers | ZL2NET

toejam316

1516 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 888

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2306200 26-Aug-2019 14:31

alasta:

A couple of questions from a dumb non-technical user;

Firstly, it says that CGNAT will not support remote access to network storage devices, security cameras and, I assume, products like Philips Hue. It seems to be that this will affect a lot of people who don't consider themselves techies?

Secondly, if IPv6 is the solution then don't ISPs put move everyone across to it instead of using CGNAT? Is there there some of roadblock or complication with migrating people over to it?

The simple answer for a non-techie is that IPv4 is the old city roads, and IPv6 is the flash new highway. To get onto IPv6 you've got to know it's there (end user equipment) and have a ramp to get on and off of it (ISP equipment) at both ends. 2degrees have provided the ramp on their end, so if there's a ramp at the far end and the equipment knows about it, it'll use IPv6. If not, it'll stick to the tried and true IPv4.

Join Quic Broadband with my referral - no sign up fee and gives me account credit

Anything I say is the ramblings of an ill informed, opinionated so-and-so, and not representative of any of my past, present or future employers, and is also probably best disregarded.

rugrat

3142 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 945

Lifetime subscriber

#2306208 26-Aug-2019 14:45

evilonenz:

I ended up contacting support via their website, and asked for the plans in regards to either opting out, or whether they would offer reduced or free Static IPs, and they have provided me with a free of charge static IPv4 address. Doesn't include a static IPv6 prefix, but thats no major. Glad my external services will continue without issue now.

Here's my chat with support

If you are worried you can opt in for static IP

yes, would there be a charge for that

Yes Garth, $10/Month

oh, someone told me they got a free one, but only ipv4 only

Just I'll be looking at going back to Spark if it's going to cost another $10 a month.

For something that wasn't broke before.

I am sorry Garth if you feel this way? "

At the moment looks like going back to Spark, seems the luck of the draw if some people getting a free one.

kiwibob1

109 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 34

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2306243 26-Aug-2019 15:24

alasta:

A couple of questions from a dumb non-technical user;

Firstly, it says that CGNAT will not support remote access to network storage devices, security cameras and, I assume, products like Philips Hue. It seems to be that this will affect a lot of people who don't consider themselves techies?

Secondly, if IPv6 is the solution then don't ISPs put move everyone across to it instead of using CGNAT? Is there there some of roadblock or complication with migrating people over to it?

First question. Yes quite right. Remote access with CGNAT will require some kind on intermediary like logmein or arlo so that the device connects to an external server (with a real IP address) that the remote user can then connect to.

Second question. IPv4 and IPv6 are two separate and mostly incompatible systems. To communicate with an IPv4 host without things breaking you need an IPv4 address. To communicate with an IPv6 host without things breaking you need an IPv6 address. (There is something called NAT64 that attempts to solve IPv6 to IPv4 communications but it's not a complete solution)

Today IPv6 is only used by 14.4% of the top 10 million websites. https://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ce-ipv6/all/all

So if you only had an IPv6 address the remaining 85% of websites would be inaccessible, no ISP could do business on this basis. The real problem is that not all the content that people want to access is available on hosts with an IPv6 address and there has been to date little motivation for content providers to add IPv6 functionality simply for the tiny number of IPv6 only users.

cyril7

9075 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2499

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2306251 26-Aug-2019 15:40

Hi, some ISPs can provide port forwarding through CG-NAT, its not impossible, and quite common, it does mean you will need to reference another public IP address that they supply for users who request remote access, its not totally flexible but a modicum of common services can be accomodated and you will need to map totally different ports, but it is possible and quite common.

Cyril

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

SirHumphreyAppleby

2942 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1863

#2306255 26-Aug-2019 15:44

IPv6-only providers do exist. There are a few VPS providers around that only provide IPv6 services, I guess because they can't obtain IPv4 addresses or they cost too much. In reality, some people only want remote hosts for shifting data around, and lack of IPv4 isn't a barrier to doing so.

I think the question @alasta posed is a valid one. I've not used IPv6 to IPv4 gateways because I've always had (and require) an IPv4 address. I see no reason why ISPs couldn't use IPv6 to IPv4 gateways as an alternative to IPv4 NAT. It would have the same limitations for IPv4 access and no limitations on IPv6. The counter-argument is probably that it doesn't improve IPv6 uptake as IPv6 is already there for many people to use, and it's just up to router and OS to use it. The real problem is many ISPs still aren't connecting users via IPv6, and many just don't care. I hope it doesn't come down to Google (which I loathe) publishing 'best practices' recommending IPv6. I'd really hope the ISP community can get their act together and start recognisng the current situation is unsustainable, and ditch IPv4 once and for all (and x86, please!).

rugrat

3142 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 945

Lifetime subscriber

#2306256 26-Aug-2019 15:48

I have a Dyson heater that can access by remote access and a wifi light bulb, can't remember brand but use Kasa to access it. Doesn't use a hub everything built into bulb. I can see what devices doing when away from home using mobile network.

If it effects heat pumps wifi and those sort of things then going to effect more then just a small percentage.

Had to create an account in cloud, so don't know how it works to find device at home, maybe they're be alright?

To me maybe CGNAT needed for ISP to grow, but not going to be good as ISP that isn't CG-NAT.

kiwibob1

109 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 34

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2306263 26-Aug-2019 15:53

SirHumphreyAppleby:

I think the question @alasta posed is a valid one. I've not used IPv6 to IPv4 gateways because I've always had (and require) an IPv4 address. I see no reason why ISPs couldn't use IPv6 to IPv4 gateways as an alternative to IPv4 NAT. It would have the same limitations for IPv4 access and no limitations on IPv6. The counter-argument is probably that it doesn't improve IPv6 uptake as IPv6 is already there for many people to use, and it's just up to router and OS to use it. The real problem is many ISPs still aren't connecting users via IPv6, and many just don't care. I hope it doesn't come down to Google (which I loathe) publishing 'best practices' recommending IPv6. I'd really hope the ISP community can get their act together and start recognisng the current situation is unsustainable, and ditch IPv4 once and for all (and x86, please!).

I suspect that a NAT64 gateway with the necessary application layer gateways would be more complex and therefore expensive than CGNAT? Could be wrong.

You are (imo) quite right we really do need ISP's to see IPv6 as a must have rather than a low priority "we'll get around to it someday" sort of project.

nzkc

1634 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1041

#2306297 26-Aug-2019 17:03

evilonenz:

I ended up contacting support via their website, and asked for the plans in regards to either opting out, or whether they would offer reduced or free Static IPs, and they have provided me with a free of charge static IPv4 address. Doesn't include a static IPv6 prefix, but thats no major. Glad my external services will continue without issue now.

I tried this but got a please call us on the 0800 number response once I got chatting to a CSR. Bit of a disappointment that - not sure why it would be the case.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | ... | 32