[arin-ppml] Do we have a fundamental conflict in theregionalgoalsfor number resource management?

[Mike Burns]

Thanks, Bill, for providing the missing expertise.

I guess if BGP prefix size is growing slower than Moore's law, that we 
should be able to process that growth organically over time.

I mean a database of 500K records is not really huge in today's computer 
world.
I would think the big iron routers which require a full BGP table could 
manipulate that database very swiftly, even if it doubles in size.
But I am out of my depth here.

I do understand the concern in the network operators group, and the 
relationship between minimum allocation block size and de-aggregation.

In a free trading environment, I would expect the value of blocks smaller 
than a /24 to be far lower than larger blocks due not to ARIN policy, but to 
network operator policy.

After all, what good is an address if it can't be routed?

But I can see the development of aggregation entities with pools of 
addresses who make money on aggregation services. As in, I have 4 /25 
networks. Can I turn them into you in exchange for a single /24? And the 
aggregator transfers a separate full /24 puts the /25s in inventory until he 
can purchase the other half of the /24s which would allow him to aggregate 
them from /25s back up to /24s, or until such time that the network operator 
community decides to generally accept /25 advertisements.

And providers could still aggregate the announcements they make, right? If 
an operator had two clients who both wanted to advertise a /25 which is 
contiguous with the other /25, could the network operator aggregate them 
into a single /24 advertisement?

Do we know whether APNIC's no-justification policy has had any effect on BGP 
table size?
I expect it's too early to tell.

Regards,

Mike




Hi Mike,

If I remember correctly from the last time I ran the numbers, the
tech's capacity per cost is compounding at around 40% annually while
the BGP table size is compounding at 20% to 25% annually. Note that
BGP prefix consumption is not growing linearly. It is compounding too,
but at a slower rate than Moore's Law. Those numbers have been more or
less stable across about 15 years. However, in the cost-capacity
calculation there is some intersection between the table size and
sustainable packets per second switching rates. Peak consumption in
packets per second has also been compounding.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004