<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7652.24">
<TITLE>RE: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-16: Ipv4 Soft Landing - a simulationanalysis</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Geoff,<BR>
<BR>
Thank you very much for the input and analysis.<BR>
<BR>
It seems that the IPv4 Soft Landing proposal makes little difference given your assumptions and calculations.<BR>
<BR>
Could you comment on what assumptions might be changed that WOULD materially alter the dates of exhaustion and why such assumptions weren't made?<BR>
<BR>
What I ask seems simple to me, but if the request turns out NOT to be simple or would be a tremendous amount of work, then I withdraw.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks again for all the work you have done for the policy process at ARIN and elsewhere!<BR>
<BR>
Bill Darte<BR>
ARIN AC<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: ppml-bounces@arin.net on behalf of Geoff Huston<BR>
Sent: Wed 1/30/2008 9:11 PM<BR>
To: ppml@arin.net<BR>
Cc: David Conrad<BR>
Subject: [ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-16: Ipv4 Soft Landing - a simulationanalysis<BR>
<BR>
I've performed some analysis on this policy proposal, attempting to<BR>
understand to what extent adoption of this proposal would materially<BR>
alter the consumption of the remaining IPv4 unallocated address pool.<BR>
<BR>
The original model I've used here is the model documented at<BR>
<A HREF="http://ipv4.potaroo.net">http://ipv4.potaroo.net</A>. This model is based on an order 2 polynomial<BR>
extrapolation of the advertised address count, As noted on that page the<BR>
current projections using that model are the exhaustion of the IANA Ipv4<BR>
address pool as of 1 June 2011 and the exhaustion of the first RIR's<BR>
unallocated address pool on the 8th August 2012.<BR>
<BR>
There are a lot of assumptions in this model, again as noted on the web<BR>
page, but question of interest here is what would be these two dates if<BR>
ALL the RIRs were to adopt this policy proposal.<BR>
<BR>
I've adopted a conservative approach to the simulation of this policy<BR>
proposal, simplifying the proposal to be a utilization level of 80% for<BR>
allocations until IANA reaches 25 /8s, when the utilization level is set<BR>
of 85%, and resetting this to 90% when the IANA pool reaches 10 /8s.<BR>
<BR>
The first step has been to generate the following table, which says<BR>
"what would be the net reduction in total allocated addresses if the 0.8<BR>
address utilisation factor was changed to a different factor value"<BR>
<BR>
Factor afrinic apnic arin lacnic ripencc<BR>
0.80 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000<BR>
0.81 0.994 0.994 0.993 0.994 0.993<BR>
0.82 0.987 0.988 0.988 0.989 0.988<BR>
0.83 0.981 0.982 0.981 0.982 0.981<BR>
0.84 0.973 0.975 0.975 0.976 0.974<BR>
0.85 0.970 0.969 0.969 0.968 0.969<BR>
0.86 0.961 0.963 0.963 0.961 0.963<BR>
0.87 0.956 0.956 0.956 0.957 0.957<BR>
0.88 0.950 0.950 0.951 0.949 0.950<BR>
0.89 0.943 0.944 0.943 0.945 0.943<BR>
0.90 0.935 0.938 0.937 0.936 0.937<BR>
0.91 0.931 0.932 0.931 0.934 0.932<BR>
0.92 0.922 0.923 0.924 0.927 0.925<BR>
0.93 0.921 0.920 0.920 0.918 0.920<BR>
0.94 0.913 0.911 0.912 0.914 0.913<BR>
0.95 0.903 0.906 0.907 0.904 0.906<BR>
0.96 0.905 0.900 0.900 0.901 0.901<BR>
0.97 0.897 0.894 0.892 0.895 0.894<BR>
0.98 0.890 0.885 0.886 0.889 0.888<BR>
0.99 0.882 0.883 0.882 0.878 0.881<BR>
1.00 0.877 0.875 0.875 0.876 0.875<BR>
<BR>
Taking the values for 0.85 and 0.90 and plugging them in to the<BR>
projection model as per the policy proposal results in the following:<BR>
<BR>
IANA exhaustion date: 8 July 2011 (was 1 June 2011)<BR>
<BR>
First RIR to exhaust its unallocated address pool: 17 October 2012 (was<BR>
8 August 2012)<BR>
<BR>
Like all simulations there are a lot of assumptions at play here, and<BR>
I've had to make a number of simplifications in modelling the policy as<BR>
proposed, but I trust that this result gives the ARIN PPML folk some<BR>
quantification of the impact of this proposal on the projected<BR>
consumption rate of the unallocated IPv4 address pools.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
<BR>
Geoff Husotn<BR>
APNIC<BR>
_______________________________________________<BR>
PPML<BR>
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy<BR>
Mailing List (PPML@arin.net).<BR>
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<BR>
<A HREF="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml</A><BR>
Please contact the ARIN Member Services Help Desk at info@arin.net if you experience any issues.<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>