Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too

[Lee Howard <lee () asgard org>]

From:  <christopher.morrow () gmail com> on behalf of Christopher Morrow
<morrowc.lists () gmail com>
Date:  Wednesday, December 20, 2017 at 6:07 PM
To:  Lee Howard <lee () asgard org>
Cc:  Mike <mike-nanog () tiedyenetworks com>, nanog list <nanog () nanog org>
Subject:  Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too

> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Lee Howard <lee () asgard org> wrote:
> > I’ve tried several times to come up with a scenario that leads to
> > depletion in less than 200 years, and I haven’t managed it. Can you do it?
>
> during some ARIN discussions that revolved around Transition Technologies and
> allocations to large ISPs, there were more than a few folk batting around the
> idea that they may need to allocate a /24 or a /20 even to a single provider.
>
> I believe DT has a /19 assigned to them currently? how many /19's are there in
> the v6 space? (524288-ish)
> That's only ~100x the current number of active ASN in the field. It's unclear
> (to me) how many of those could/would justify a /19 equivalent, and how fast
> the ASN field is growing over time.

DT is one of the largest ISPs in the world, isn’t it?

Can you devise a scenario in which there are 524,288 ISPs the size of DT?
Or one where every currently active ASN, times 100X, needs/justifies a /19?

> 200 years seems optomistic, 20 years seems easy to imagine surpassing though.
> What's the sweet spot?
>  

200 years seems pessimistic to me. Every scenario I run uses ridiculously
profligate assumptions, and usually multiplies those by a few orders of
magnitude. Even extrapolating from your math above, I don’t get less than
2222CE.

Lee