Re: AT&T UVERSE Native IPv6, a HOWTO

[Cutler James R <james.cutler () consultant com>]

On Dec 3, 2013, at 12:04 AM, Eric Oosting <eric.oosting () gmail com> wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 11:11 PM, Rob Seastrom <rs () seastrom com> wrote:
>
> > "Ricky Beam" <jfbeam () gmail com> writes:
> >
> > > On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 08:39:59 -0500, Rob Seastrom <rs () seastrom com>
> > wrote:
> > > > So there really is no excuse on AT&T's part for the /60s on uverse
> > 6rd...
> > > ...
> > > Handing out /56's like Pez is just wasting address space -- someone
> > > *is*  paying for that space. Yes, it's waste; giving everyone 256
> > > networks when  they're only ever likely to use one or two (or maybe
> > > four), is  intentionally wasting space you could've assigned to
> > > someone else. (or  **sold** to someone else :-)) IPv6 may be huge to
> > > the power of huge, but  it's still finite. People like you are
> > > repeating the same mistakes from  the early days of IPv4...
> >
> > There's finite, and then there's finite.  Please complete the
> > following math assignment so as to calibrate your perceptions before
> > leveling further allegations of profligate waste.
>
> I know this is rhetorical, but my hobby is answering peoples rhetorical
> questions.
>
>
> >   Suppose that every mobile phone on the face of the planet was an "end
> >   site" in the classic sense and got a /48 (because miraculously,
> >   the mobile providers aren't being stingy).
>
> Very well, I'll play your silly game.
>
> 48 bits remaining.
>
>
> >   Now give such a phone to every human on the face of the earth.
>
> 33 bits should do it. That gets us to nearly 9 billion people.
>
> 15 bits remaining.
>
>
> >   Unfortunately for our conservation efforts, every person with a
> >   cell phone is actually the cousin of either Avi Freedman or Vijay
> >   Gill, and consequently actually has FIVE cell phones on active
> >   plans at any given time.
>
> 5 is inconvenient. Lets give everyone 8 mobil phones, using 3 bits.
>
> 12 bits remaining.
>
>
> >   Assume 2:1 overprovisioning of address space because per Cameron
> >   Byrne's comments on ARIN 2013-2, the cellular equipment providers
> >   can't seem to figure out how to have N+1 or N+2 redundancy rather
> >   than 2N redundancy on Home Agent hardware.
>
> 1 bit for that.
>
> 11 bits remaining.
>
> Now we're assigning space out of 2000::/3 for now ... lets keep the other
> 7/8ths of the ipv6 address block in reserve, using another 3 bits ...
> leaving ... carry the one ... 8 bits.
>
>
> > What percentage of the total available IPv6 space have we burned
> > through in this scenario?  Show your work.
>
> If we give every man, woman, and child on the face of the earth the
> equivalent to (16) /48s each, we'll will have used 1/256th of the first
> 1/8th of the IPv6 address space.
>
> Wolfram says there have been 110 billion homo sapiens that have ever lived.
> We need to give every person who has literally ever lived on planet earth
> their own /40 before we've used up 2000::/3, and need to move on to the
> remaining 87.5% of the address space. (this is where someone will ding me
> for the misuse of "literally" somehow with a pointer to theoatmeal comic,
> right)
>
> -e
>
>
> > -r

Does this mean we can all get back to solving real IPv6 deployment and operations problems?

I certainly hope you all can finally see which is the better business choice between: 

 1. Using up to around 10% of IPv6 space to make our network operations simpler for the next twenty years or more.

 2. Continuing to spend time and money on micromanagement of addressing rather than real customer needs.

One who cannot properly understand the business decision here perhaps should not be debating network policies.

— “Strongly worded letter to follow."

James R. Cutler
james.cutler () consultant com

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail