[128279] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Thu Jul 29 15:09:30 2010
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C51BD54.8040900@sprunk.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:06:18 -0700
To: Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jul 29, 2010, at 10:41 AM, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
> On 29 Jul 2010 12:19, Owen DeLong wrote:
>> On Jul 29, 2010, at 8:00 AM, Matthew Walster wrote:
>>=20
>>> On 29 July 2010 15:49, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> If we give every household on the planet a /48 (approximately 3 =
billion /48s), we consume less than 1/8192 of 2000::/3.
>>>>=20
>>> There are 65,536 /48s in a /32. It's not about how available =
2000::/3
>>> is, it's hassle to keep requesting additional PA space. Some ISPs
>>> literally have millions of customers.
>>>=20
>> If you have millions of customers, why get a /32? Why not take that =
fact and ask for the right amount of space? 1,000,000 customers should =
easily qualify you for a /24 or thereabouts. If you have 8,000,000 =
customers, you should probably be asking for a /20 or thereabouts.
>>=20
>=20
> ... and paying sixteen times as much in assignment and maintenance
> fees. See the problem there?
>=20
If you have millions of IPv4 customers, then, you're already paying that
for your IPv4 space. Since you pay the greater of your IPv4 or IPv6
utilization, I think the larger you are, the less likely it is that you
will be paying more for IPv6 than IPv4, even if you give your customers
all /48s of IPv6 instead of /32s of IPv4.
>> It's not rocket science to ask for enough address space, and, if you =
have the number of customers to justify it based on a /48 per customer, =
the RIRs will happily allocate it to you.
>>=20
>=20
> Yes. However, I don't think the RIRs are as willing to give out =
address
> space for _potential_ customers, e.g. if a telco or cableco wanted to
> assign a single block to each CO/head end to account for future =
growth.=20
> OTOH, you can get address space based on a /48 per actual customer, =
then
> actually assign a /64 per potential customer and have enough for =
massive
> growth.
>=20
I believe you can actually do this to a pretty large extent within =
policy.
The tricky part comes when you need more space and haven't met the
HD Ratio requirements across the board. I agree there's room for =
improvement
in the policy here.
>> Why waste valuable people's time to conserve nearly valueless
>> renewable resources?
>>=20
>=20
> By creating artificial scarcity, one can increase profits per unit of
> nearly-valueless, renewable resources. See also: De Beers and the
> demonizing of artificial diamonds.
>=20
There are lots of opportunities to exploit people. I was limiting my =
comments
to the layer 0-7 issues for the most part. I think optimizing the =
exploitation
of customers is probably out of charter for this list.
Owen
