[arin-ppml] [arin-council] Submitted to ARIN Consultation and Suggestion Process

[Joel Jaeggli]

On Aug 19, 2011, at 7:48 AM, Heather Schiller wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 4:08 AM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Aug 18, 2011, at 5:53 PM, Paul Vixie wrote:
>> .
>> 
>>>> Not so much the way the prefix was acquired as when the prefix was
>>>> acquired. IMHO, if you acquire prefixes that late in the game, you should
>>>> expect that some people might be out of routing slots and may not be able
>>>> to carry them. IPv4 is doomed to this fate IMHO. ...
>>> 
>>> can you explain why IPv6 would not be similarly doomed ?
>> 
>> Because I don't need another /16 when I put 65,000 hosts on my /64?
>> 
>> Owen
>> 
> 
> I believe Paul's point is: What makes you so sure that people with
> limited routing slots, will choose to carry those new fangled v6
> things that only geeks are using, versus turning off v6 in order to
> carry more v4 routes?

Assuming that your box is configured for a cam split of something like .5 million v4 routes and 16k v6 routes (I know of boxes with this split), dialing back v6 to zero only gets you around a 7% increase in your available v4 routes. that might be enough in a pinch but it doesn't solve your ipv4 problem by any means.

>  There isn't a magical routing table separation
> inside the box.  Providers know who they can reach on v4, they know
> there is content on v4 and that they will have less complaints and
> more customers working if they choose v4 over v6.  Another thing that
> could happen is that folks move to filter on /23 or shorter, instead
> of /24.  It's hard to imagine that today, but that may be more
> palatable than dropping entire regions.

an alternative of course beyond fib compression by policy, is buying new linecards or routers, which does happen...

Not to many AS border routers are limited to 255k routes anymore, we've had and have surmounted this problem many times before, and so long as it doesn't happen too quickly planned obsolecence takes it's course. if you fit a line to the cidr (reports) in 2007/2008 you'll be buying new routers in 2012/2013.

> In all of this, I have not seen a push for better aggregation

Shame has never worked before, why would it now?

> - so
> here is a nudge.. if you see your company on the list, go ask why and
> see what can be done to aggregate.
> http://www.cidr-report.org/as2.0/#Gains  for the full list.
> 
> ASnum  	NetsNow	  NetsAggr	  NetGain	  % Gain  	Description
> Table  	371480	  219140	  152340	  41.0%  	All ASes
> 	 	 	 	 	
> AS6389  	3583	  231	  3352	  93.6%  	BELLSOUTH-NET-BLK - BellSouth.net Inc.
> AS18566  	1912	  376	  1536	  80.3%  	COVAD - Covad Communications Co.
> AS4766  	2498	  969	  1529	  61.2%  	KIXS-AS-KR Korea Telecom
> AS22773  	1433	  106	  1327	  92.6%  	ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC - Cox
> Communications Inc.
> AS4755  	1531	  223	  1308	  85.4%  	TATACOMM-AS TATA Communications
> formerly VSNL is Leading ISP
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> 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:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>