Re: Extending a /64

[Philip Homburg <[e-mail]>]

>Since allocations are done block wize and not linearly you have to account
>for future growth so generally over allocate for growth next 20 years.  So
>with that the much larger allocations.
>
>That still is small since most large ISPs like, we Verizon
>we want to scale to a billion as right now we have 150M and that's just
>domestic not worldwide.  Safe best for large ISPs is we want to scale to
>the number of humans on the planet so 7 Billion is a good number.  

This is subject to RIR policies. I.e., does a RIR accept expenential growth
over 20 years as a basis for an allocation request. Does an RIR want to
allocate space for 7 billion connections when an ISP now has 150 million
customers.

The five RIRs together form the NRO. In theory, they could reach out to the
IETF if address space policies don't fit in the space allocated.

Or we could look at the rate at which IANA allocates /12s to RIRs. See for
example https://www.nro.net/wp-content/uploads/NRO-Statistics-2020-Q2-FINAL.pdf
for the current state.

The current trent is that 2000::/3 is big enough that we can provide endusers
with /48s for a very long time. From an allocation point of view, there 
doesn't seem to be any reason to move the 64-bit boundary.