Re: estimation of number of DFZ IPv4 routes at peak in the future

[George Herbert <george.herbert () gmail com>]

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
> On Mar 9, 2011, at 4:06 AM, Arturo Servin wrote:
>
> > On 9 Mar 2011, at 07:18, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> > > one of these curves is steeper than the other.
> >
> >       That's what we wanted for the first one.
> >
> > > http://www.cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/plota?file=%2fvar%2fdata%2fbgp%2fv6%2fas2.0%2fbgp-active%2etxt&descr=Active%20BGP%20entries%20%28FIB%29&ylabel=Active%20BGP%20entries%20%28FIB%29&with=step
> >
> > > http://www.cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/plota?file=%2fvar%2fdata%2fbgp%2fas2.0%2fbgp-active%2etxt&descr=Active%20BGP%20entries%20%28FIB%29&ylabel=Active%20BGP%20entries%20%28FIB%29&with=step
> > >
> > > If the slope on the second stays within some reasonable bounds of it's
> > > current trajactory then everything's cool, you buy new routers on
> > > schedule and the world moves on. The first one however will eventually
> > > kill us.
> >
> >       It won't, it will take an "S" shape eventually. Possibly around 120k prefixes, then it will follow the normal 
> > growth of the Internet as v4 did.
> I think it will grow a lot slower than IPv4 because with rational planning, few organizations should need to add more
> prefixes annually, the way they had to in IPv4 due to scarcity based allocation policies.

...which was, ultimately, a large part of the point of going to 128
bits.  The most important one for networks.

-- 
-george william herbert
george.herbert () gmail com