It looks like you missed few threads… Regards, Desi Valli From: Matthew Moyle-Croft [mailto:mmc at internode dot com dot au]
Desi, Does anyone in India, currently, have any issue obtaining more IPv4 addresses as they're needed? If anything this demonstrates how IPv6 and a rapid take up of IPv6 will help India as it'll move away from various historic allocation issues with IPv4. Especially as IPv4 costs are going to rise with allocations not fall as the free
market takes hold. It's unclear what your point is and what relevance this has to the APNIC EC elections? MMC On 26/07/2010, at 5:08 PM, Desi Valli wrote:
Hi, That's a human view, still not the worm's view. just kidding:-). Please note that the statistics what I produced is based on the number of users and not based on number of connections. For example, as of Dec 2009, Australia had 5.13million Connections.
Comparing to this, India had 7.82 million BB connections. However, India also had 7.42 narrow-band(Dial-up) connections and 149 million mobile-wireless data subscribers. 5.133million connections results in 17,033,826 Users in Australia. Approximately for every
connection there are 3.31 users. Whereas India counts its users based on BB & dial-up only, totalling 15.24million connections and resulting in 83 million users. (data card connections are not considered as unique users,
as they are considered as secondary connection for a primary BB user). Approximately for every connection India has 5.44 users. The Connection to user ratio is normally based on house-hold factors and the possible average employees per company that uses Internet. So, going with your input, the following is the statistics:
(Note: India & Australia are taken as sample to understand the gaps between developed & developing countries, there is nothing beyond that. Hence let’s not start a cricket match between
these 2J) Yes, you are right that the commodity services (ADSL & Dialup) are using public IPs and not NAT, but only till the WAN port of ADSL router or Ethernet router. You just get one IP as the
WAN IP for the ADSL router. But your LAN IPs will be on NAT, managed by consumers. Public LAN IPs if required are charged additionally, by the service provider – Check that out. Another reality check – There were 29,563 Connections on leased lines. These all are of business as home users go for only ADSL. These leased line customers are assumed to have an average
of 100 PCs behind. However, while a leased line is provided ISP provides a total of 8 or 16 IP addresses. The organisation manages remaining everything through NAT/Proxy. If additional IP addresses are required you will have to pay for it – Check that out. Similar to leased line there are 74,290 business connections through Wireless last-miles (Fixed wireless). The same scenario like leased line is applicable. Now think about the mobile wireless
(2.5G/2G) data connections and the IPs required. Even if I go with your 40% BRAS loading (which anyways is not true), there are approximately 65.6 million connections established at any point including the mobile wireless connections.
Total IP resources taken by India is only 22.27 million IP addresses. Please note that India is also expected to have around 2.29million Nodes, including servers, routers, switches etc., that uses public IP addresses. PS: To understand the sweat, blood & soil from the worms view, I welcome you to join our association ISPAI and understand the anguish of members. May not be only because of IP, but that’s
also a concern. Regards, Desi Valli. -----Original Message----- Hi, I want to add my observations to one of the points Desi raised in his email. Desi Valli wrote: > */Why would India has only 0.27 IP address per Internet User, and not > like Australia which has 2.59 IP addresses per user. If there is no > issue in price, when the IP address space grew by 536% for developed > countries, while the user base grew only by 205%, developing countries > and least develop countries didn’t participate in the race. IN > developing countries & LDCs the IP address space growth is less than the > growth of Internet users. Does that mean TATAs and SIFY’s are not > interested in having a public IP and interested in NAT?/* From my perspective (having now spent 12 months working in India) there is a lower subscriber:IP ratio, because the average session duration is much shorter. In my experience the typical BRAS loading ratio is only about 40% of provisioned subscribers. In Australia, people typically leave broadband sessions up 24x7 which results in 1 IP address being consumed per subscriber for the fixed broadband session, and additional IPs are consumed for other sessions (e.g. work PC; mobile phone; data card; whatever). If I look at myself as a typical user I have an always-on work Internet connection; a personal always-on Internet connection; and a couple of mobile devices -- all consuming IP addresses. I'm sure as the Indian market grows in broadband consumption, and becomes more of an always-on service that the consumption of IP resources will rapidly increase and start to reflect the sort of ratios seen in Australia. I'm sure that NAT is heavily used in India, although I am personally yet to encounter it on any commodity services. I would be very interested to hear from operators who say that NAT is cheaper to deploy than it is to obtain additional IP resources because I don't think that is true - but I'd like to see if it is and what the logic used was to conclude that. Have any operators found they were unable to afford more resources even though surely their subscriber base is increasing? aj (there are othe reasons for Australia's higher IP-per-Sub count, such as legacy institutions with pre-CIDR allocations etc) Message sent using India’s leading Hosted Microsoft Exchange service. Message sent using India’s leading Hosted Microsoft Exchange service. For details visit http://net4.in/net4app/aspx/Exchange/exchangeIntro.aspx Please consider the environment before printing.
|