Hi, On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 05:07:24PM +0000, JÃrgen Hovland wrote:
<html><body><div>I don't think the point of IPv6 is to spend, spend, spend either.</div><div>A limited resource will always run out. If you think you are going to need a quadruple billion IP-addresses on every LAN, then sure go a head and spend.
Do the math. A limited resources (IPv6 addresses) distributed over *another* limited resource (humans running networks) will or will not run out, depending on the distribution ratio. As in: if you have 100 cakes and 5 kids, there is no way these kids are going to eat all the cakes, no matter how liberal your cake distribution policies are. We've been distributing IPv6 prefixes for slightly over 20 years now, and we haven't used up 1% of 1/8 of the IPv6 space yet. The growth curve isn't exponential, as the number of "ISP like" entities that will request a prefix from the RIRs is limited - right now, below 20.000 LIRs in the RIPE NCC service region. To give them all a /29 would need half a /14. Now, we have LIRs that are happy with a /32, and we have others that need (or at least "can argue for") a /19 - but those are few, like 1-2 per country. Overall the numbers suggest that all of RIPE land should be fine with a /10 or /9. Which is 1/512 of the total IPv6 space (or 1/64 of FP001 which is all that is available today). Gert Doering -- APWG chair, and math enthusiast -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279