nanog mailing list archives
Re: V6 still not supported
From: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2022 12:10:54 +0200
No, isn't only a Sony problem, becomes a problem for every ISP that has customers using Sony PSN and have CGN (NAT444), their IP blocks are black-listed when they are detected as used CGN. This blocking is "forever" (I'm not aware of anyone that has been able to convince PSN to unblock them). Then the ISP will rotate the addresses that are in the CGN (which means some work renumbering other parts of the network). You do this with all your IPv4 blocks, and at some point, you don't have any "not black-listed" block. Then you need to transfer more addresses. So realistically, in many cases, for residential ISPs it makes a lot of sense to analyze if you have a relevant number of customers using PSN and make your numbers about if it makes sense or not to buy CGN vs transfer IPv4 addresses vs the real long term solution, which is IPv6 even if you need to invest in replacing the customer CPEs. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 30/3/22, 21:02, "NANOG en nombre de Jared Brown" <nanog-bounces+jordi.palet=consulintel.es () nanog org en nombre de nanog-isp () mail com> escribió: Not to necessarily disagree with you, but that is more of a Sony problem than an IPv4 problem. - Jared Jordi Palet wrote: It is not a fixed one-time cost ... because if your users are gamers behind PSP, Sony is blocking IPv4 ranges behind CGN. So, you keep rotating your addresses until all then are blocked, then you need to transfer more IPv4 addresses ... So under this perspective, in many cases it makes more sense to NOT invest in CGN, and use that money to transfer up-front more IPv4 addresses at once, you will get a better price than if you transfer them every few months. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 30/3/22, 18:38, "NANOG en nombre de Jared Brown" <nanog-bounces+jordi.palet=consulintel.es at nanog.org en nombre de nanog-isp at mail.com> escribió: Randy Carpenter wrote: > >> >> Owen DeLong via NANOG wrote: > >> >> When your ISP starts charging $X/Month for legacy protocol support > >> > > >> > Out of interest, how would this come about? > >> > >> ISPs are facing ever growing costs to continue providing IPv4 services. > > Could you please be more specific about which costs you are referring to? > > > > It's not like IP transit providers care if they deliver IPv4 or IPv6 bits to > > you. > > Have you priced blocks of IPv4 addresses lately? IPv4 address blocks have a fixed one-time cost, not an ongoing $X/month cost. - Jared ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
Current thread:
- Re: V4 via V6 and IGP routing protocols, (continued)
- Re: V4 via V6 and IGP routing protocols Mark Tinka (Apr 03)
- Re: V4 via V6 and IGP routing protocols Dave Taht (Apr 03)
- RE: V4 via V6 and IGP routing protocols Pascal Thubert (pthubert) via NANOG (Apr 03)
- Re: V4 via V6 and IGP routing protocols Mark Tinka (Apr 04)
- Re: V4 via V6 and IGP routing protocols Mark Tinka (Apr 03)
- Re: V4 via V6 and IGP routing protocols Dave Taht (Apr 04)
- RE: V6 still not supported Pascal Thubert (pthubert) via NANOG (Apr 01)
- Re: V6 still not supported Ryland Kremeier (Apr 01)
- Re: V6 still not supported Abraham Y. Chen (Apr 01)
- Re: V6 still not supported Jared Brown (Apr 04)
- Re: V6 still not supported Abraham Y. Chen (Apr 04)
- Re: V6 still not supported JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG (Apr 04)
- Re: V6 still not supported Joe Maimon (Apr 04)
- Re: V6 still not supported JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG (Apr 04)
- Re: V6 still not supported Owen DeLong via NANOG (Apr 05)
- Re: V6 still not supported Joe Maimon (Apr 04)
- Re: V6 still not supported Jared Brown (Apr 04)
- Re: V6 still not supported JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG (Apr 04)
- Re: V6 still not supported Owen DeLong via NANOG (Apr 05)
- Re: V6 still not supported Francis Booth via NANOG (Apr 04)
- Re: V6 still not supported JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG (Apr 04)
- Re: V6 still not supported Joe Greco (Apr 04)
- Re: antique CGN complaints, was V6 still not supported John Levine (Apr 04)
- Re: V6 still not supported JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via NANOG (Apr 04)