And for further clarification... I put this response together based on the data I saw from Geoff a couple of months ago, and couldn't check the URL in the air. Everyone should check the site because he has included further evaluation of the data. I apologize for any perception or inference that Geoff may not have been presenting valid data. The data he has been presenting is valid for what it measures, our differences of opinion have been over what and where to measure. That said, I stand by the point that if the recent depletion rate of 9 /8s in 6 months holds, there are only 58 months left. That event may have been an anomaly, or it may be the precursor to an even more accelerated run rate. We won't know for several years which it was. Tony > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Tony Hain > Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2004 12:37 PM > To: 'Geoff Huston'; 'Harald Tveit Alvestrand' > Cc: v6ops@xxxxxxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx; 'Pekka Savola' > Subject: RE: IPv4 consumption statistics and extrapolations > > Geoff Huston wrote: > > I would like to correct a few numbers in Tony's comments based on my > work > > in this area that Tony has referred to. > > > > The least squares best fit of advertised address space in the IPv4 > domain > > over the past 5 years is a consumption rate of 4 /8s per year, slightly > > less than half of Tony's number > > To continue the refinement; as you frequently point out as well, there is > a > lag between request/assignment from the RIR and advertisement. Given that, > the advertisement growth you are quoting does not account for the recent > slope change in the IANA pool depletion I am referencing, and won't even > start to do so for another 6-12 months. > > > > > Even over the past 10 months the least squares best fit of data is a > > consumption rate of 5.5/8's per year > > Let's be clear, consumption rate from the pool is not the same as > advertisement rate you are basing your measurements on. The size of the > advertised pool has absolutely no bearing on the size of the remaining > stock > held by IANA or the RIR's. The slopes may be on a time delayed track, but > there is always the opportunity for addresses to be pulled from the pool > yet > never advertised. As my I-D on 1918bis points out there are organizations > that have outgrown the available private space, so there only current > option > is to acquire public space they never intend to route. > > > > > At this rate the central pool will exhaust in 2018, some 14 years hence. > > No, by your measure this is the date the advertised pool will be receiving > all possible prefixes. As we have discussed before, there are two problems > with these numbers, the first is that it assumes all currently reserved /8 > prefixes can and will be used (by my count there were really only 78 > useful > ones left in August), and second that it assumes that someone will find > and > reclaim the ~13% of the space currently 'lost in the system' (the > difference > between the IANA reserved and RIR-assigned). > > > i.e. some 168 months hence. Allowing for an accelerating consumption > rate > > at an exponential rate brings this forward to 10 years, or 120 months. > > (details of the analysis are at http://bgp.potaroo.net/ipv4/) > > > > (Of course you should consult your favourite oracle, mystic, soothsayer > or > > whatever for your own preferred version of the future.) > > We can probably all agree that the 'last IPv4 address' will never be > acquired. Policies will become stricter until the price is so high that > nobody can afford it; or nobody will care once the replacement is deployed. > > Tony > > > > > regards, > > > > Geoff > > > > > > At 07:38 AM 6/11/2004, Tony Hain wrote: > > >Harald, > > > > > >I would like to congratulate you on your successes, and suggest you > have > > the > > >opportunity to be the last chair to preside over active work related to > > >version 4 of the IP protocol suite. With the publication of the > tunneling > > >drafts that v6ops has been sitting on, there is no further need to > > discuss > > >32 bit address objects. At the same time, there is really no further > > >justification for any other IETF working group to be discussing 32 bit > > >addresses in current work. With all due respect to Geoff's efforts to > > >document the address growth rate in the routing system, even he > > acknowledges > > >that measure lags the allocation timeframe and assumes the RIRs will > > recover > > >all space currently considered lost. Given that IANA allocated 9 /8's > > over a > > >6 month period this year, coupled with the fact that only 78 /8's > remain > > in > > >the useful part of the pool (ie: 52 month burn out), it should be clear > > to > > >everyone that products that rely on current standards activities will > > appear > > >in the market place after the central pool of 32 bit values has run dry. > > As > > >such I would recommend your legacy include an active review of all > > working > > >group discussions next week for items related to IPv4, followed by > > closure > > >of all 32 bit address related work items before your departure in March. > > > > > >Tony > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf > > Of > > > > Harald Tveit Alvestrand > > > > Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 1:20 AM > > > > To: ietf@xxxxxxxx > > > > Subject: Stepping down as IETF chair in March > > > > > > > > Thomas' note reminded me that there are probably some people who > > haven't > > > > heard this yet.... > > > > > > > > I'm stepping down as IETF chair in March, and I am not a candidate > for > > > > reappointment. > > > > > > > > It's been a great four years, containing lots of learning experience, > > lots > > > > of hard work and lots of joy - but after four years as IETF chair, > and > > ten > > > > years total on the IESG/IAB, March seems an appropriate time for me > to > > > > leave this stage of my life behind. > > > > > > > > The IETF is a great organization. I will enjoy watching it continue > to > > > > grow > > > > and prosper under new leadership. > > > > > > > > Thank you! > > > > > > > > Harald > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Ietf mailing list > > > > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >Ietf mailing list > > >Ietf@xxxxxxxx > > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ietf mailing list > > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf