[ppml] Big numbers

[Lee Howard]

Big bang equal infinite.  We can all think of worst-case scenarios where
an attitude that IPv6 addresses are free and undepletable could lead to
depletion.  The example I like to give is of IPv6 addresses replacing
UPC codes, and every trip to WalMart results in another couple hundred
addresses in the trash bin at the curb.  If we treat v6 as if it's 
infinite, then the value of each address is infinitely small and can be 
infinitely wasted.  

Further burning of bits toward the left may be dangerous.  IMHO, YMMV

Lee


On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, David Conrad wrote:

> Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 12:56:26 -0700
> From: David Conrad <david.conrad at nominum.com>
> 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
> 
>