<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/04/2017 14:50, Noah wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEqgTWYjrFJHLHqCS-5t-Yt19eiR2TeKdrT49Fu-gdZNsnXSXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="auto">Elkin,
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Ok talking of ASN's, since most networks either
have a /32 or /48 IPv6 allocation assigned to them, shall we
safely suggest that only less that 20k networks (ASN's)
announce their IPv6 aggregates. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">In anycase, a prefix count of over 600k for
IPv4 vs over 30k for IPv6 and an ASN count of over 60k
originating IPv4 prefixes vs an ASN count of over 10k
originating IPv6 prefixes, my argument still holds on
restricting remaining IPv4 space and allocate it on need
basis.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Using your numbers, if one looks at the Address Table ratio of 600
to 30, thats 20:1<br>
Using your ASN count ratio - its now 60:20 or 3:1.<br>
a 3:1 ratio seems a lot worse than a 20:1 ratio<br>
<br>
I'd still like to see what the real ratios are though.<br>
I did find at:-
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/ipv6-asns-size-matters">https://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/ipv6-asns-size-matters</a><br>
"At 70%, the percentage of IPv4 address space announced by ASNs that
also announce IPv6 is in stark contrast with the fact that only
around 1.5% of end users can actually use the IPv6 Internet,
according to Google's statistics."<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEqgTWYjrFJHLHqCS-5t-Yt19eiR2TeKdrT49Fu-gdZNsnXSXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Meanwhile lets promote more IPv6 adoption for
those already with address space.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
With that - I agree,<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEqgTWYjrFJHLHqCS-5t-Yt19eiR2TeKdrT49Fu-gdZNsnXSXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Noah</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 3 Apr 2017 3:07 p.m., "Mark Elkins"
<<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:mje@posix.co.za"
target="_blank">mje@posix.co.za</a>> wrote:<br
type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="m_7803991381028628571moz-cite-prefix">On
03/04/2017 13:41, Noah wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="auto">
<div class="gmail_extra" dir="auto">
<div class="gmail_quote">On 3 Apr 2017 12:55 a.m.,
"Owen DeLong" <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:owen@delong.com" target="_blank">owen@delong.com</a>>
wrote:
<blockquote
class="m_7803991381028628571m_1810656746959895520m_6843614678881653038m_-5475388209816379493m_9034709772667685842m_-6499524129114321128m_7693449808421022706m_-8149278776555314776m_4900756124411544424m_-6710358418235089684m_728535152234043059quote"
style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I am not calling for softening and
depleting IPv4 at this stage, but I don’t
see any advantage to tightening it, either.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">The last i checked, the IPv4 FIB is
handling over 600k aggregate prefixes vs IPv6 FIB
that stands at close to only 40k aggregate prefixes
a compeling fact that the internet is still largely
dependent on IPv4 today.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Noah, you can't use that argument. Perhaps a better number
to look at would be how many ASN's there are in the
routing table, and how many of them are IPv4 only vs how
many have both IPv4 and IPv6 or even IPv6 only.<br>
<br>
Most ISP's run with one ASN but many run with multiple
ASN's - but I believe ASN's would be a better measurement.<br>
<br>
I, as an ISP advertise one /32 of IPv6, and multiple IPv4
prefixes.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Very few IPv6 only green fields to say
the least.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra" dir="auto">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote
class="m_7803991381028628571m_1810656746959895520m_6843614678881653038m_-5475388209816379493m_9034709772667685842m_-6499524129114321128m_7693449808421022706m_-8149278776555314776m_4900756124411544424m_-6710358418235089684m_728535152234043059quote"
style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In fact, I would argue that by insisting
on holding resources in the free pool for
“possible future newcomers” you are, in
effect, assigning them to organizations
without any current proof of physical
infrastructure in the AfriNIC service region
to the disadvantage of organizations that do
currently have proof of infrastructure and a
documented need for the addresses within the
region today.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">IMHO, your premise is flawed, i<span
style="font-family:sans-serif">n my experience
(having worked for 3 SP startups and still do),</span>
because we were all startups at some point when we
involved ourselves in the business of connecting
folk to the internet and every iron that we fired up
then and today needed and still needs at the very
least an IPv4 address to connect to the internet. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Occasionally at AFRINIC Meetings, we have an "IPv6 only"
day. Generally, most people survive just fine. I think
this "IPv6 Only" day event should perhaps be something we
always do at our meetings. Its also been done at SAFNOG
(Southern African NOG) a few times.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="auto">In anycase, IPv6 internet is still
developing sponteneously at almost 40k prefixes
announced with a few case studies around the US,
Europe, Asian and some parts of Africa and South
America and could take another decade as long as
telecoms around the world still run CGN's. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">IMHO market forces and tech-dynamics
(IoT) will push for IPv6 adoption and until then,
the over a decade aggressive invetments in IPv4
internet will still stand even though most equipment
and software today pretty much supports IPv6.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Noah</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="m_7803991381028628571moz-signature" cols="72">--
Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="m_7803991381028628571moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mje@posix.co.za" target="_blank">mje@posix.co.za</a> Tel: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:+27%2012%20807%200590" value="+27128070590" target="_blank">+27.128070590</a> Cell: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="tel:+27%2082%20601%200496" value="+27826010496" target="_blank">+27.826010496</a>
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="m_7803991381028628571moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://ftth.posix.co.za" target="_blank">https://ftth.posix.co.za</a>
</pre>
</div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mje@posix.co.za">mje@posix.co.za</a> Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://ftth.posix.co.za">https://ftth.posix.co.za</a>
</pre>
</body>
</html>