[182350] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Dual stack IPv6 for IPv4 depletion
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Wed Jul 15 12:00:38 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPkb-7AV0PMCkstBqVA18p72SSkex+D4==3WXnGN2wQ0pz3VHA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 08:58:19 -0700
To: Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Jul 15, 2015, at 03:43 , Baldur Norddahl =
<baldur.norddahl@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> On 15 July 2015 at 01:34, Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com> wrote:
>=20
>> For one thing a /32 is nowhere near enough for anything bigger than a
>> modest ISP today. Many will need /28, /24, or even larger. The =
biggest ones
>> probably need /16 or even /12 in some cases.
>>=20
>=20
> What is the definition of a modest and a large ISP?
>=20
> In the RIPE region even the smallest ISP can get a /29 with no
> documentation necessary. But likely that is all they will ever get =
because
> policy requires that you use that /29 at about 30% efficiency if you =
do /48
> allocations to end users.
Which is fine=E2=80=A6 30% of a /29 at /48 is 524,288 end-sites served. =
For a
residential provider, I=E2=80=99d say that=E2=80=99s a medium-sized =
provider.
A large provider would be one that serves several million end-sites. =
There
are at least a handful of providers in the US for example, that have =
10,000,000+
customers. A /29 wouldn=E2=80=99t be enough for them.
RIPEs policy ignores the inefficiencies created by topology and that=E2=80=
=99s kind
of unfortunate in my opinion, but so far it doesn=E2=80=99t appear too =
egregious, so
I haven=E2=80=99t taken the time to propose better policy.
> You would need more than a million users to get a /24.
Sure. Many ISPs have more than a million end-sites (note end-sites !=3D =
users).
In many cases customer and end-site are synonymous, but in many cases, a
single customer may have many end-sites. For example, a business which
has several buildings in a campus may treat each building as an =
end-site.
A multi-tenant building would likely treat each tenant as a separate =
end-site.
etc.
> I do not think the RIPE region has an ISP large enough to apply for a =
/16
> or anything near it.
Perhaps. There are at least 2 ISPs in the US that I know of with =
20,000,000+
customers. Since the NA in NANOG stands for North America, I kind of =
figured
that the situation in North America ought to be considered somewhat =
relevant.
> Therefore we can conclude that if ARIN manages to use up all the /3 =
address
> space currently reserved for allocation, we will still be able to get
> address space in Europe for the next thousands years :-). It is =
thought
> that RIPE will not use up the /12 that IANA allocated to RIPE - ever.
I doubt even with our current policy, ARIN is unlikely to use up the /12 =
in my
lifetime or even in the lifetime of the IPv6 protocol. Even if we do, I =
doubt we
will use more than 2 or 3 /12s ever.
> Personally I believe the ARIN policy is the sane one. But we need to =
abide
> by the rules in the region we live in.
I agree with you, but as the author of the current ARIN ISP IPv6 policy, =
I
may be biased. ;-)
Owen
