Re: [v6ops] [GROW] Deaggregation data

[Nick Hilliard <[e-mail]>]

On 20/10/2014 22:58, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> NOTE: why don't v6 allocations in that file have 'ALLOCATED PA' in
> their entries?

because there are only two types of v6 blocks: ALLOCATED PA and ASSIGNED
PA.  The assignments aren't in that document and for v4, there are several
types of status: ASSIGNED PA, ASSIGNED PI, ALLOCATED PA, ALLOCATED PI,
EARLY REGISTRATION OR LIR-PARTITIONED.

>> The baseline for starting to deaggregate will be much lower for ipv6 and
>> there will be much less pressure in future to deaggregate.
> 
> why is that? I thought geoff's numbers/reasons for deaggregation were
> linked more to TE (perceived or supposed) than anything else? (maybe a
> bunch of 'redistributed connected' as well)

the baseline is lower because we're starting off with a situation where
most LIRs have been allocated all the ipv6 address space they will ever need.

The deaggregation pressure will be lower because the only deaggregation
pressure will be from TE and there will be no need to slide-n-dice IPv6
address blocks in future asset sales, and no last /20 per RIR.  IPv4 space
has deaggregation pressure from last /8 assignments, from TE requirements
and will have future pressure from asset sales.  Once divided, the
allocations will be impossible to reaggregate.

Nick