Re: Wasting address space (was: Re: Last Call: 'Considerations on the IPv6 Host density Metric' to Informational RFC (draft-huston-hd-metric))

On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 08:12:28PM +0200, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> On 3-jun-2006, at 5:33, Steven Blake wrote:
> 
> >I am concerned about the conclusion reached in this document (that HD
> >ratios > 0.8 and closer to 0.94 should be considered when making  
> >address
> >allocations to larger providers).  I believe that:
> 
> >(1) this would not solve a real problem,
> 
> A little foresight never hurt anyone. If IPv4 space had been given  
> out using today's policies from the start, that would have given us a  
> decade or so more time with IPv4.
> 

	one should remember that when IP blocks were first handed out,
	there was the expectation that there would be very few networks
	with 10s or 100s of thousands of hosts (pre A/B/C/D split)
	which is a shadowy reflection of todays "IPv6 aggreagates to Tier1"
	model...  kind of spooky eh? 

	modern delegation policy follows the CIDR construct, which strives
	to only delegated the amount of space that will actually be used...
	if this were more strict, then the RIRs would have significantly
	larger free pool from which to make delegations... but it would 
	wreck havoc on the iten of a single, global routing system..   

	granted, these are gross generalizations, but the trends are there.

--bill

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf