nanog mailing list archives

Re: It's Ars Tech's turn to bang the IPv4 exhaustion drum


From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch () muada com>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 23:01:22 +0200

On 18 aug 2008, at 21:18, Justin M. Streiner wrote:

Just because IPv6 provides boatloads more space doesn't mean that I like wasting addresses :)

That kind of thinking can easily lead you in the wrong direction.

For instance, hosting businesses that cater to small customers generally have a lot of problems with their IPv4 address provisioning: for a customer that only needs one or a few IPv4 addresses, it's not feasible to create a separate subnet, because that wastes a lot of addresses. But invariably, these customers on shared subnets grow, so over time the logical subnet gathers more and more IPv4 address blocks that are shared by a relatively large number of customers, and because of resistance to renumbering, it's impossible to fix this later on.

With IPv6 on the other hand, you can easily give each customer their own prefix which they'll pretty much never grow out of, and not be forced to artificially keep lots of customers in the same VLAN.

The extra 96 bits do make a difference.


Current thread: