This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/

[members-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: New Charging Scheme

Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: New Charging Scheme
Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: New Charging Scheme

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

ivaylo ivaylo at bglans.net
Mon Jan 21 19:35:30 CET 2019

Hello,

I dont full agree. As IPV6 space is not infinite number, the space can 
over in some moment.

Let me give you same example as yours:

If you have 5 kids and 100 cakes, it is clear that they cant fully eat the 
cakes. But if you give all the 100 cakes to the kids, they will bite 
a little from every cake to taste if there are difference, and in the end 
you will end up with 0 cakes and lot of uneaten valuable resources.


Ivaylo Josifov
Varteh LTD
Varna Bulgaria

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019, Gert Doering wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 05:07:24PM +0000, J?rgen Hovland wrote:
>> <html><body><div>I don't think the point of IPv6 is to spend, spend,
>> spend either.</div><div>A limited resource will always run out. If you
>> think you are going to need a quadruple billion IP-addresses on every LAN, then sure go a head and spend.
>
> Do the math.  A limited resources (IPv6 addresses) distributed over
> *another* limited resource (humans running networks) will or will not
> run out, depending on the distribution ratio.
>
> As in: if you have 100 cakes and 5 kids, there is no way these kids are
> going to eat all the cakes, no matter how liberal your cake distribution
> policies are.
>
>
> We've been distributing IPv6 prefixes for slightly over 20 years now,
> and we haven't used up 1% of 1/8 of the IPv6 space yet.  The growth
> curve isn't exponential, as the number of "ISP like" entities that
> will request a prefix from the RIRs is limited - right now, below
> 20.000 LIRs in the RIPE NCC service region.  To give them all a /29
> would need half a /14.   Now, we have LIRs that are happy with a /32,
> and we have others that need (or at least "can argue for") a /19 - but
> those are few, like 1-2 per country.
>
> Overall the numbers suggest that all of RIPE land should be fine with
> a /10 or /9.  Which is 1/512 of the total IPv6 space (or 1/64 of FP001
> which is all that is available today).
>
> Gert Doering
>        -- APWG chair, and math enthusiast
> -- 
> have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
>
> SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer
> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
> D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
> Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
>

Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: New Charging Scheme
Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: New Charging Scheme

Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

[ members-discuss Archives ]