[167178] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: AT&T UVERSE Native IPv6, a HOWTO
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Dec 2 23:56:08 2013
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <86haaq60bv.fsf@valhalla.seastrom.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 20:50:27 -0800
To: Rob Seastrom <rs@seastrom.com>
Cc: NANOG List <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Dec 2, 2013, at 20:11 , Rob Seastrom <rs@seastrom.com> wrote:
>=20
> "Ricky Beam" <jfbeam@gmail.com> writes:
>=20
>> On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 08:39:59 -0500, Rob Seastrom <rs@seastrom.com> =
wrote:
>>> So there really is no excuse on AT&T's part for the /60s on uverse =
6rd...
>> ...
>> Handing out /56's like Pez is just wasting address space -- someone
>> *is* paying for that space. Yes, it's waste; giving everyone 256
>> networks when they're only ever likely to use one or two (or maybe
>> four), is intentionally wasting space you could've assigned to
>> someone else. (or **sold** to someone else :-)) IPv6 may be huge to
>> the power of huge, but it's still finite. People like you are
>> repeating the same mistakes from the early days of IPv4...
>=20
> There's finite, and then there's finite. Please complete the
> following math assignment so as to calibrate your perceptions before
> leveling further allegations of profligate waste.
>=20
> Suppose that every mobile phone on the face of the planet was an =
"end
> site" in the classic sense and got a /48 (because miraculously,
> the mobile providers aren't being stingy).
>=20
> Now give such a phone to every human on the face of the earth.
>=20
> Unfortunately for our conservation efforts, every person with a
> cell phone is actually the cousin of either Avi Freedman or Vijay
> Gill, and consequently actually has FIVE cell phones on active
> plans at any given time.
>=20
> Assume 2:1 overprovisioning of address space because per Cameron
> Byrne's comments on ARIN 2013-2, the cellular equipment providers
> can't seem to figure out how to have N+1 or N+2 redundancy rather
> than 2N redundancy on Home Agent hardware.
>=20
> What percentage of the total available IPv6 space have we burned
> through in this scenario? Show your work.
>=20
> -r
>=20
Quick napkin version:
6.8 Billion people * 10 =3D 68Billion /48s.
32 bits =3D 4 billion (we all know that from IPv4, right?)
A /16 is 4 Billion /48s.
A /15 is 8 Billion
A /14 is 16 Billion
A /13 is 32 Billion
A /12 is 64 Billion
A /11 leaves room to spare at more than 128 Billion /48s.
So, we need 2 /12s. We have already issued RIRs 6 /12s (as of 3Q2013), =
leaving 506 /13s in 2000::/3
We could easily issue the global total need of 2 /12s (a /11) to each =
RIR (there are 5), so total of 10 in addition to what has already been =
issued, and we'd have issued a total of 16 /12s leaving 494 /12s in =
inventory in 2000::/3.
For convenience, I will remind everyone that 2000::/2 represents 1/8th =
of the total address space.
Further, for those that are worried about population explosions causing =
this not to scale, even if the population on the planet expanded by an =
order of magnitude so that we had to issue 100 /12s, w would still have =
406 /12s remaining in 2000::/3.
Owen
