RE: ipv4's last graph

["Tony Hain" <alh-ietf () tndh net>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Barnes [mailto:richard.barnes () gmail com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 10:44 AM
> To: Tony Hain
> Cc: Vincent Hoffman; nanog () nanog org
> Subject: Re: ipv4's last graph
>
> Note that the ARIN, APNIC, and RIPE lines should all basically level
> out to asymptotes after they hit 1 /8 left, due to the "soft run out"
> policies in place [1][2][3].  Either that, or just consider arriving
> at 1 /8 left as depletion.

The /8 that applies to those policies has not been allocated yet ... ask
again tomorrow.

Would it make more sense to mark the graph at 1 with an asterisk, or just
leave those out of this graph all together? If you care about how well the
policy is managing the end of the pool, then marking 1 is the right thing,
while if you only care about when 'old policy' stops then it makes more
sense to just leave them off.

Tony

> Geoff: How are your graphs dealing with these policies?
>
> [1] <https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#four10>
> [2] <http://www.apnic.net/policy/add-manage-policy#9.10.1>
> [3] <http://ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2010-02.html>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Tony Hain <alh-ietf () tndh net> wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Vincent Hoffman [mailto:jhary () unsane co uk]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 9:44 AM
> > > To: nanog () nanog org
> > > Subject: Re: ipv4's last graph
> > >
> > > On 02/02/2011 17:22, Matthew Petach wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Tony Hain <alh-ietf () tndh net>
> wrote:
> > > > > So in the interest of 'second opinions never hurt', and I just
> can't
> > > get my
> > > > > head around "APnic sitting at 3 /8's, burning 2.3 /8's in the
> last 2
> > > months
> > > > > and the idea of a 50% probability that their exhaustion event
> occurs
> > > Aug.
> > > > > 2011", here are a couple other graphs to consider.
> > > > > http://www.tndh.net/~tony/ietf/IPv4-rir-pools.pdf
> > > > > http://www.tndh.net/~tony/ietf/IPv4-rir-pools-zoom.pdf
> > > > >
> > > > > Tony
> > > > Two things:
> > > >
> > > > 1) you'll get better uptake of your graph if it's visible as a
> simple
> > > >      image, rather than requiring a PDF download.  :/
> > > Not wishing to advertise google but
> http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.tndh.net/~tony/ietf/IPv4-
> > > rir-pools.pdf
> > > and
> http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.tndh.net/~tony/ietf/IPv4-
> > > rir-pools-zoom.pdf
> > >
> > >
> > > works for me without needing to download a pdf viewer
> >
> > For some reason that viewer didn't work here, so I added jpg's to the
> site.
> > http://www.tndh.net/~tony/ietf/IPv4-rir-pools.jpg
> > http://www.tndh.net/~tony/ietf/IPv4-rir-pools-zoom.jpg
> >
> >
> > > Vince
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 2) labelling the Y axis would help; I'm not sure what the scale
> > > > of 1-8 represents, unless it's perhaps the number of slices of
> > > > pizza consumed per staff member per address allocation request?
> >
> > I thought about leaving it off completely, but figured I would be
> asked for
> > scale. It is /8's remaining until they drop into their 'last
> allocation'
> > policy. I will see if I can figure out how to fit that into something
> > readable.
> >
> >
> > > > But I do agree with what seems to be your driving message, which
> > > > is that Geoff could potentially be considered "optimistic".  ^_^;
> >
> > Geoff has always been the optimist ...  ;0
> >
> >
> > > > Matt