Given the stakes involved, and the eminently plausible outcome that
some small quantity of IPv4 may continue to be both non-substitutable
and non-optional for independent operations for a very long time to
come -- much longer than ten years -- AND the fact that there will no
way to remedy the situation if your assumptions about the time-to-
tipping point turn out to be mistaken, wouldn't it be prudent to plan
in a way that preserves as much flexibility as possible for an unknown
future? As Randy noted, the run rate for sub-/8s is often measured in
days... Is it really worth continuing on a course that everyone knows
is destined to end for a few days more, at the price of giving up much
freedom to adjust to unknown/changing circumstances in the future?
No reductio ad absurdum reactions please -- the price of this policy
as written is a few lost *days* of status quo allocation activity,
nothing more.
TV
On Jul 28, 2008, at 8:31 AM, David Woodgate wrote:
Thanks, Geoff - this is useful information for the discussion.
It seems to confirm that the likelihood of getting to 8,000 LIRs in
the next 10 years is very unlikely. (And I suspect that not all of
the 4,403 LIRs to whom allocations have been made by APNIC would be
active now.)
Regards,
David
At 03:13 PM 28/07/2008, Geoff Huston wrote:
David Woodgate said the following on 22/7/08 14:10:
My main problem is that prop-062 seems to risk locking up the
majority of the last /8, and therefore does not share it at all,
let alone in a fair and equitable fashion.
I don't see how it is locking up the majority of the final /8.
Would you please explain this.
prop-062 allows for 16,000+ LIRs to each get a minimum /22
allocation. As discussed in a previous email, it seems hard to
justify even 4,000 LIRs over the next few years; I'd suggest that
8,000 LIRs in the Asia-Pacific seems unlikely within 10 years. That
would seem to leave up to 8,000-12,000 * /22s unclaimed for a long
time. But - if I'm reading it correctly - prop-062 doesn't seem to
suggest that anything else would be done with this unclaimed space,
and therefore it won't be used during that time; that is, the space
is "locked up" and unused.
you make the claim that:
"it seems hard to justify even 4,000 LIRs over the next few years;
I'd suggest that 8,000 LIRs in the Asia-Pacific seems unlikely
within 10 years
Here's some historical data that may be useful in the context of
this particular
aspect of the discussion
APNIC publish an "extended" version of the daily stats file
(ftp://ftp.apnic.net/pub/stats/apnic/delegated-apnic-extended- latest")
The last field in each row is a code for the end entity recipient of
the address allocation or assignment, or approximately "LIR" in your
terminology.
Now there is some small uncertainty in the figures as at times the
NIR code
is used instead, but overall heres the Ipv4 allocation record for
APNIC since
2000, based on the numbers in that published file
year new repeat cumulative count
2000 94 432 2856
2001 86 430 2942
2002 83 339 3025
2003 115 425 3140
2004 120 570 3260
2005 216 617 3476
2006 253 786 3729
2007 394 745 4123
2008 280 429 4403
i.e. in 2007 APNIC made 394 IPv4 address allocations to "new" LIRs
and 745 allocations to LIRs who had already previously received an
address allocation. Overall APNIC appears to have made allocations /
assignments to 4,403 LIRs since its inception, and some 1,547 new
LIRs have been recorded since 1 Jan 2000 (i.e the last 8.5 years)
regards,
Geoff
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management
policy *
_______________________________________________
sig-policy mailing list
sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
