[arin-ppml] Policy discussion - Method of calculating utilization
mysidia at gmail.com
Fri May 2 20:52:52 EDT 2014
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 7:33 PM, John Santos <JOHN at egh.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2 May 2014, Jimmy Hess wrote:
> I think 95% is too high, if the previous example of 3 /24's at 100% and
> 1 /24 at 75% is realistic. That works out to 93.75% aggregate utilization,
> not quite reaching the bar, so 90% might be a better threshold.
For 3 /24s yes. The difficulty here, is trying to pick a single
utilization proportion that works regardless of the aggregate
allocation size, to allow for the loss of the oddball /26 or /27 that
can neither be returned nor reused, perhaps another method is in
order than presuming a single aggregate utilization criterion is
the most proper.
The more resources you are allocated, the more opportunity to make
your resource allocation efficient. By the time you get down to a
/26, an entire /24 is less than 0.4%.
Aggregate Resources Allocated Required Aggregate
more than a /25 75%
more than a /22, 80%
more than a /20 85%
more than a /19 90%
more than a /18 95%
more than a /17 97%
more than a /16 98%
more than a /15 99%
> OTOH, /24's are pretty small and maybe that example was just for
> illustration. If people really in this situation have much larger
> allocations, they would be easier to slice and dice and thus use (relatively)
> efficiently. 75% of a /24 leaves just 64 addresses (a /26) unused, which
> even if contiguous are hard to redeploy for some other use. 75% of a /16
> would leave 16384 unused addresses, which could be utilized much more easily.
> Personally, I don't much care since my company has its /24, and that's
> probably all the IPv4 we'll ever need :-)
> John Santos
> Evans Griffiths & Hart, Inc.
> 781-861-0670 ext 539
More information about the ARIN-PPML