[ppml] Policy Proposal: Decreasing Exponential Rationing of IPv4 IP Addresses

[Dean Anderson]

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:

> On 31-aug-2007, at 1:24, Dean Anderson wrote:
> 
> >>> Aug 4, shows April 16th, 2010.  Tony Hain now says April 2010.
> 
> >> And I say during the London summer olympics.
> 
> > Ok. Except that you are just pulling your number out of your hat. The
> > other two use some math to compute the rate and compute the remaining
> > address space.
> 
> It's not that simple. 

It is that simple: Your claim "no trend" is an assertion which isn't
based on any fact.  You've made no study, no statistical calculation
(which could show 'no trend'), nor anything else to support your claims.  
In otherwords, You have no basis for disputing their claim.

> Tony and Geoff take their assumptions (why use the last 1095 days and
> 1250 or 943?) and put them into formulas which then produce results
> with many digits after the decimal point. 

You are free to recalculate their results using different periods.  
However, using different periods may not produce greatly different
results. It would of course be interesting if it did.  

I'm looking into some things, but I have nothing to report yet.

> I take several possibilities, see where they lead and then try to come
> up with something that seems reasonable based on my interpretation of
> the past.
> 
> Tony and Geoff's approach would probably be better at projecting a  
> trend into the future, 

That's the goal of their work...



The rest of this doesn't seem to be going anywhere that is in anyway
relevant to rationing policy for IPv4, and no one else seems to be
interested in debating these issues.  I look forward to debating them 
again sometime.  Have a good weekend.

		--Dean



-- 
Av8 Internet   Prepared to pay a premium for better service?
www.av8.net         faster, more reliable, better service
617 344 9000