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

[Arturo Servin <arturo.servin () gmail com>]

        http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,5&cluster=6058676534328717115  

@article{cittadini2010evolution,
  title={{Evolution of Internet Address Space Deaggregation: Myths and Reality}},
  author={Cittadini, L. and Muhlbauer, W. and Uhlig, S. and Bush, R. and Fran{\c{c}}ois, P. and Maennel, O.},
  journal={Selected Areas in Communications, IEEE Journal on},
  volume={28},
  number={8},
  pages={1238--1249},
  issn={0733-8716},
  year={2010},
  publisher={IEEE}
}

        But times are changing and IMHO in the future the growth would be because of deaggregation (in v4). For v6 the 
growth I assume is (and will be) allocation, but I do not have a research to support that.

-as

On 9 Mar 2011, at 16:00, David Conrad wrote:

> On Mar 9, 2011, at 7:28 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> > > 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.
>
> The implication of this statement would seem to be that the reason the routing tables are growing is due primarily to 
> allocations and not deaggregation (e.g., for traffic engineering).  Does anyone have any actual data to corroborate 
> or refute this?
>
> Regards,
> -drc