[ppml] Big numbers

[John M. Brown]

which should support the idea that IPv6 allocation requirements
should be "more flexible" and such.

I agree its NOT the RIR's job to determine routability.  Let 
the market decide that.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On 
> Behalf Of David Conrad
> Sent: Monday, April 07, 2003 1:56 PM
> To: ppml at arin.net
> Subject: [ppml] Big numbers
> 
> 
> Apropos a comment I made during the Q&A during the IPv6 working group 
> discussion...
> 
> According to the latest IPv6 architecture drafts:
> - 35,184,372,088,832 /48s currently available for assignment
> - a bit under 246,290,604,621,824 /48s available under the 
> other format 
> specifiers
> 
> Just for fun, according to the US Census bureau:
> - Estimated world population as of 4/7/03, 15:29 GMT+5: 6,285,260,947
> - Estimated world population in 2050: ~9,000,000,000
> 
> Taking the 35,184,372,088,832 /48s currently available for 
> assignments, 
> this means:
> - 5600 /48s per person today
> - 3909 /48s per person in 2050
> 
> And then there are the other format specifiers...
> 
> Note that those are /48s (each capable of addressing 64K /64s or, if 
> you want ignore the auto-configuration goop that eats the lower 64, 
> 1,208,925,819,614,629,174,706,176 /128s).
> 
> As such, I don't believe address conservation is or will be 
> an issue.  
> At least for the lifetime of IPv6.  Keeping the routing system 
> constrained undoubtedly is, although I'm not convinced this 
> is the RIRs 
> job (after all, RIRs explicitly do not guarantee routability)...
> 
> (Hope I got my math right... :-))
> 
> Rgds,
> -drc
>