Re: [v6ops] Chair decision on WGLC for draft-ietf-v6ops-dhcp-pd-per-device-04

[Martin Huněk <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

Dne pondělí 6. listopadu 2023 0:59:42 CET, David Farmer napsal(a):
> Are you saying you have more than 500,000,000 hosts and therefore need
> ~8000 /48s to do /64 per host?

This was actually bit of sarcasm. The reaction to Jordi as he suggested that we could give 1 /48 to every human on the planet and be good X years to come. :-)
> 
> I have approximately 50,000 to 75,000 hosts on my WiFi networks at
> any moment on my largest campus. My WiFi networks are split into 4 WiFi
> roaming zones, and I would assign a /48 per roaming zone. We currently
> assign /16s of RFC 1918 IPv4 space to each WiFi roaming zone.
> 
> That is ~260,000 /64s or 4 /48s for 50,000 to 75,000 hosts. Yes, we are an
> LIR, but within ARIN policy, I have assigned /40s for each of my 5 campuses
> statewide. My largest campus would qualify for a /36 within ARIN policy.

Lucky you. We are not an LIR so we are limited to a single /48. Our upstream does have /29, but it is allowed to assign only /48 without RIPE's approval.
> 
> You have an IPv6 address policy problem, not an IPv6 architectural problem.
> The idea that all organizations should fit in a single /48 is nonsense.

No dispute there. I could use bigger address space, but without this draft I would manage even with /48. With it, I'm not quite sure about that.

Regards,
Martin
> 
> On Sun, Nov 5, 2023 at 17:27 Martin Huněk <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> > Jordi,
> >
> > Please tell me where I can get my ~8000 /48s for the non-LIR University
> > I'm working for. So far, I have 1 /48. And because we started our address
> > plan in around 2007, it does not take into consideration every single host
> > having /64.
> >
> > Also, as we are surrounded by other networks, I cannot expect to get my
> > assignment extended, not by a single bit, even when the RIPE NCC would
> > allow it (it currently does not). That would mean renumbering the whole
> > network, which is not something I'm keen to do.
> >
> > Theoretically, It is possible by current RIPE policy to extend one's
> > assignment/allocation. However, this is pure fiction in practice. I've
> > tried that in the case of my second employer (LIR ISP) to get my /29
> > extended to /28, but no luck, even when meeting the criteria.
> >
> > Saying that we can give every human /48 could work if we would route IPs
> > to people in global routing tables. Fortunately, we want to aggregate ...
> >
> > Regards,
> > Martin
> >
> > Dne neděle 5. listopadu 2023 19:57:25 CET jste napsal(a):
> > > In a /3 there are 35.184.372.088.832 /48s
> > >
> > > if we underestimate the utilization to the 50%, that get’s us to half:
> > 17.592.186.044.416 /48s
> > >
> > > If the population gets to 34.359.738.368 people (not sure if that will
> > fit in the earth), and we estimate that every human will live 100 years,
> > and after that we don’t recover every /48, then with a single IPv6 /3, we
> > will have a total IPv6 life-span of 51.200 years.
> > >
> > > If we use the rest of the /3s, then we get up to 409.600 years.
> > >
> > > And to be honest, I don’t think it makes sense to bury each /48 when a
> > human pass away, same I don’t think that we should calculate it per human
> > instead of householder, but I prefer to be pessimistic in terms of lifetime.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Jordi
> > >
> > > @jordipalet
> > >
> > >
> > > > El 5 nov 2023, a las 19:46, Gert Doering <[e-mail]> escribió:
> > > >
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Nov 05, 2023 at 07:42:03PM +0100, [e-mail]
> > wrote:
> > > >> It is pure maths.
> > > >
> > > > Geoff's maths disagree with yours.  I prefer to err on the side of
> > caution.
> > > >
> > > > Gert Doering
> > > >        -- NetMaster
> > >
> > >
> > > **********************************************
> > > IPv4 is over
> > > Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> > > http://www.theipv6company.com
> > > The IPv6 Company
> > >
> > > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
> > confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of
> > the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized
> > disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
> > information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly
> > prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the
> > intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or
> > use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including
> > attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal
> > offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this
> > communication and delete it.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6ops mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops
> >
>