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

[John Schnizlein]

Thank you for the clarification.  I had missed the worst-case estimate  
in the fragmentation section:

"This could have an impact on fragmentation and, therefore, on the  
routing system, assuming these transferable blocks are announced  
specifically."

Has there been any more analysis of how close or how quickly the  
"193,000 allocations" might be reached?

How does this worst cast compare to the number of routes already in  
the global route table for traffic engineering and hijack-prevention?

John

On 2008Oct7, at 5:42 AM, Filiz Yilmaz wrote:
>
> I would like to make a clarification regarding:
>
> 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.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>