Re: minimum IPv6 announcement size

[joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com>]

On Sep 27, 2013, at 10:04 AM, Randy Carpenter <rcarpen () network1 net> wrote:

> > There is no bit length which allocations of /20's and larger won't
> > quickly exhaust. It's not about the number of bits, it's about how we
> > choose to use them.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bill Herrin
>
> True, but how many orgs do we expect to fall into that category? If the majority are getting /32, and only a handful 
> are getting /24 or larger, can we assume that the average is going to be ~/28 ? If that is so, then out of the 
> current /3, we can support over 30,000,000 entities. Actually, I would think the average is much closer to /32, since 
> there are several orders of magnitude more orgs with /32 than /20 or smaller. Assuming /32 would be 500 million out 
> of the /3. So somewhere between 30 and 500 million orgs.
>
> How many ISPs do we expect to be able to support? Also, consider that there are 7 more /3s that could be allocated in 
> the future.
>
> As has been said, routing slots in the DFZ get to be problematic much sooner than address runout. Most current 
> routers support ~1 million IPv6 routes. I think it would be reasonable to assume that that number could grow by an 
> order of magnitude or 2, but I don't thin we'll see a billion or more routes in the lifetime of IPv6. Therefore, I 
> don't see any reason to artificially inflate the routing table by conserving, and then making orgs come back for 
> additional allocations.

In ipv4 there are 482319 routes and 45235 ASNs in the DFZ this week, of that 18619 ~40% announce only one prefix. given 
the distribution of prefix counts across ASNs it's quite reasonable  to conclude that the consumption of routing table 
slots is not primarly a property of the number of participants but rather in the hands of a smaller number of large 
participants many of whom are in this room.

> -Randy

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