[ppml] Proposed Policy: IPv4 Countdown

[Bill Darte]

> From: David Conrad [mailto:drc at virtualized.org] 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 10:29 PM
> To: Bill Darte
> 
> > >I suspect -customers- will have to pay whatever the market 
> demands. 
> > >ISPs will undoubtedly be happy to route prefixes provided 
> to them by 
> > >their customers for a (perhaps not so) nominal fee.  Of 
> course, this 
> > >implies fragmenting prefixes and a surge in the amount of 
> > >unaggregatable routing information being propagated back and forth 
> > >(whether this is a real problem depends is an interesting ongoing 
> > >debate).
> >
> > This is the real problem of the end-game IMO.... It is going to put
> > added pressure on the route table and bring that very real problem  
> > to the fore.
> > Addressing is not broken nearly as bad as routing for the future.
> 
> It might be useful to point this out to your Friendly Neighborhood  
> Router Vendor.  At least one large router vendor apparently believes  
> it is realistic to build routers that can handle millions of 
> routes.   
> Since current hardware can't (as I understand it) handle that 
> sort of  
> routing load, they should get busy...
> 
> Rgds,
> -drc
> 

So my question for anyone to answer...
What is the 'average size' assignment today?  Given that....
If the legacy and oversized assignments of the past were 'sold or
leased' off in the IPv4 black market....
How many new routing slots would that consume....and over how much time?

MIT's /8 is conserved as a /14 or /15 for internal use...the rest is
leased to the highest bidder....that kinda thing...

bd