The DMCA notices for that single ipv4 /32 must be interesting.
On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:35 AM Colton Conor <colton.co...@gmail.com> wrote: > 300 apartments Mark. No, it's bulk internet and wifi so a single provider. > > On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 8:01 PM Mark Andrews <ma...@isc.org> wrote: > > > > And how many apartments where covered by that single IP address? Was this > > where there is a restriction on other providers so the occupants had no > > choice of wireline ISP? > > > > > On 23 Sep 2021, at 09:38, Colton Conor <colton.co...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Where does this "You can only have about 200-300 subscribers per IPv4 > > > address on a CGN." limit come from? I have seen several apartment > > > complexes run on a single static IPv4 address using a Mikrotik with > > > NAT. > > > > > > On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 2:49 PM Baldur Norddahl > > > <baldur.nordd...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, 22 Sept 2021 at 16:48, Masataka Ohta < > mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Today, as /24 can afford hundreds of thousands of subscribers > > >>> by NAT, only very large retail ISPs need more than one > > >>> announcement for IPv4. > > >> > > >> > > >> You can only have about 200-300 subscribers per IPv4 address on a > CGN. If you try to go further than that, for example by using symmetric > NAT, you will increase the number of customers that want to get a public > IPv4 of their own. That will actually decrease the combined efficiency and > cause you to need more, not less, IPv4 addresses. > > >> > > >> Without checking our numbers, I believe we have at least 10% of the > customers that are paying for a public IPv4 to escape our CGN. This means a > /24 will only be enough for about 2500 customers maximum. The "nat > escapers" drown out the efficiency of the NAT pool. > > >> > > >> The optimization you need to do is to make the CGN as customer > friendly as possible instead of trying to squeeze the maximum customers per > CGN IPv4 address. > > >> > > >> Perhaps IPv6 can lower the number of people that need to escape IPv4 > nat. If it helps just a little bit, that alone will make implementing IPv6 > worth it for smaller emerging operators. Buying IPv4 has become very > expensive. Yes you can profit from selling a public IPv4 address to the > customer, but there is also the risk that the customer just goes to the > incumbent, which has old large pools of IPv4 and provides it for free. > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> > > >> Baldur > > >> > > > > -- > > Mark Andrews, ISC > > 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia > > PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: ma...@isc.org > > >
