[arin-ppml] IPv6 /32 minimum for extra-small ISP

Bill Woodcock woody at pch.net
Wed Apr 14 16:04:37 EDT 2010

Yes, Milton.  You're being presented with facts about how routers operate, not a speculative framework to challenge. 

The router doesn't care how important you think a route is, or how much you like it, or how many IP addresses or users sit behind it. It's still a route, and the amount of memory it consumes is still just dependent upon its associated path and options. 

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:58:30 
To: 'James Hess'<mysidia at gmail.com>; NOC at changeip.com<NOC at changeip.com>
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net<arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv6 /32 minimum for extra-small ISP

> -----Original Message-----
> The problem is that even if you got an extremely small allocation
> that as soon as you advertise it, you consume the same amount of
> routing resources on everyone else's BGP router on the Internet,
> that someone with a larger allocation has who is advertising theirs.
> Thus it is not fair to base pricing solely on the amount of numbering.

Just curious. Has this assertion ever been tested, examined, modeled?
There are two logical components to this statement that I am interested in verifying:
A small allocation:
a) "consumes the same amount of resources"
b) on "everyone else's" BGP router

The latter is an especially strong claim.

Milton Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
Internet Governance Project:

You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list