nanog mailing list archives
Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course
From: Stephen Sprunk <stephen () sprunk org>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:41:40 -0500
On 29 Jul 2010 12:19, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Jul 29, 2010, at 8:00 AM, Matthew Walster wrote:On 29 July 2010 15:49, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:If we give every household on the planet a /48 (approximately 3 billion /48s), we consume less than 1/8192 of 2000::/3.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.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.
... and paying sixteen times as much in assignment and maintenance fees. See the problem there?
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.
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. 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.
Why waste valuable people's time to conserve nearly valueless renewable resources?
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. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Current thread:
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course, (continued)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Matthew Walster (Jul 30)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Valdis . Kletnieks (Jul 30)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Owen DeLong (Jul 30)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course JC Dill (Jul 30)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Owen DeLong (Jul 29)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Tim Franklin (Jul 29)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Jeroen Massar (Jul 29)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Tim Franklin (Jul 29)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Owen DeLong (Jul 29)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Tim Franklin (Jul 29)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Stephen Sprunk (Jul 29)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Owen DeLong (Jul 29)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Mark Smith (Jul 22)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Joe Maimon (Jul 22)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Owen DeLong (Jul 22)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Joe Maimon (Jul 23)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Mark Smith (Jul 23)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Marco Hogewoning (Jul 23)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course JORDI PALET MARTINEZ (Jul 23)
- Re: Addressing plan exercise for our IPv6 course Doug Barton (Jul 23)