[arin-ppml] uncoordinated market for IPv4 addresses will cause routing failure

Dear John,

I would like to make a clarification regarding:

On 6 Oct 2008, at 17:12, John Schnizlein wrote:

>
> In the context of similar discussion in RIPE, it seems that an  
> impact on the global route table is not expected.
> http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-08.html
>  "the RIPE NCC does not anticipate that any significant impact will  
> be caused if this proposal is implemented"
> Is there enough difference between ARIN addresses and RIPE  
> addresses to think the conclusion for ARIN would be different?
>


The analysis for proposal 2007-08 (Enabling Methods for Reallocation  
of IPv4 Resources) in RIPE region has two parts:

A. Impact of Policy on Registry and Addressing System
       -- Address/Internet Number Resource Consumption
       -- Fragmentation/Aggregation

and

B. Impact of Policy on RIPE NCC Operations/Services

The quote above as  "the RIPE NCC does not anticipate that any  
significant impact will be caused if this proposal is implemented" is  
the information provided for part B, regarding the impact on RIPE NCC  
Operations and Services.

You can find the full analysis at http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/ 
proposals/2007-08.html,
which I copied below for your convenience.

Kind regards,

Filiz Yilmaz
Policy Development Officer
RIPE NCC


------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--------------------------------------------------

[from http://www.ripe.net/ripe/policies/proposals/2007-08.html]

...

Additional Information:

Note: In order to provide additional information related to the  
proposal, details of an impact analysis carried out by the RIPE NCC  
are documented below. The projections presented in this analysis are  
based on existing data and should be viewed only as an indication of  
the possible impact that the policy may have if the proposal is  
accepted and implemented.

A. Impact of Policy on Registry and Addressing System

Address/Internet Number Resource Consumption:

After analysing the data that is currently available, the RIPE NCC  
does not anticipate any significant impact on address/Internet  
resource consumption if this proposal is implemented.

Fragmentation/Aggregation:

When this calculation was made, the RIPE NCC had made approximately  
11,100 IPv4 allocations. Today, the minimum allocation size is a /21,  
and according to the proposal this would be the minimum size possible  
for a block being transferred. If each of the 11,100 allocations were  
split into /21s to be transferred, there would eventually be 193,000  
allocations (about 17 times more than there currently are). This  
could have an impact on fragmentation and, therefore, on the routing  
system, assuming these transferable blocks are announced specifically.

So far, the different blocks that the RIPE NCC had allocated space  
from had different maximum prefix sizes, depending on the minimum  
allocation size the policy set at various times. These varying  
longest prefix sizes per /8 can be seen in the document “Address  
Space Managed by the RIPE NCC”: http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ 
ripe-415.html. Once this proposal is implemented, the longest prefix  
size for all blocks will need to be set to one size, a /21, which is  
the current minimum allocation size that the RIPE policy allows.

B. Impact of Policy on RIPE NCC Operations/Services
After analysing the data that is currently available, the RIPE NCC  
does not anticipate that any significant impact will be caused if  
this proposal is implemented.

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--------------------------------------------------