[ppml] IPv6 flawed?

Brian,

On Sep 4, 2007, at 11:13 AM, briand at ca.afilias.info wrote:
> - breaking the hard limit will most likely result in IPv6 getting  
> tossed

Very true.  An interesting point I hadn't really considered.

> So, the short term need, to avoid a "tragedy of the commons" effect,
> where short term is likely 3-5 years, is that O(IPv6 PI) == O(ASNs).
> Meaning, we need to keep PI space down to about 1 per ASN.

According to <http://www.conference.sanog.org/slides/conference/ 
sanog10-pfs-deaggregation-report.pdf>, we're seeing the  
"deaggregation factor" increase "slowly and steadily since 'records  
began'", with the fastest growth occurring in the "new" Internet (the  
graph on page 15 is very interesting).  Since IPv6 uses the same  
routing and traffic engineering technology as IPv4, I am curious what  
constraints could be put in place to keep PI space down to about 1  
per ASN.  Particularly given PI allocation policies either have been  
or are being liberalized in all the RIRs (for sound economic and  
business reasons, at least from the perspective of the Internet end  
users).

Perhaps more distressingly, if you believe the post IPv4 run out  
world is going to be awash with long prefixes taken from holders of  
legacy space as IPv4 address space is used more efficiently after  
free pool run out, the deaggregation factor of the "old" Internet is  
likely going to ramp up quite quickly.  This would seem to imply IPv6  
could get strangled long before it could take off, regardless of RIR  
allocation policies.

Regards,
-drc