RE: Waste will kill ipv6 too

["Keith Medcalf" <kmedcalf () dessus com>]

The "minimum" network size for IPv4 is a /29
The "Minimum" network size for IPv6 is a /64

That means that IPv6 has 2**(64-29) more minimal sized networks that IPv4 (the fact that the size of those networks is 
different is immaterial).

2**(64-29) is 34,359,738,368 or 3.4e10

That is quite a few more networks.

Even the currently allocated space contains 2,147,483,648 times the number of "minimum sized networks" as IPv4.

---
The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces () nanog org] On Behalf Of Mel Beckman
> Sent: Wednesday, 20 December, 2017 14:39
> To: William Herrin
> Cc: nanog () nanog org
> Subject: Re: Waste will kill ipv6 too
>
> Bill,
>
> You are correct.
>
> As a double check, I divided 340282366920938463463374607431768211456
> by 4294967296, getting
> 79228162514264<tel:79%20228%20162%20514%20264>337593543950336<tel:337
> %20593%20543%20950%20336>, which is 28.8 orders of magnitude :)
>
> -mel
>
> On Dec 20, 2017, at 12:58 PM, William Herrin
> <bill () herrin us<mailto:bill () herrin us>> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Mel Beckman
> <mel () beckman org<mailto:mel () beckman org>> wrote:
> I won’t do the math for you, but you’re circumcising the mosquito
> here. We didn’t just increase our usable space by 2 orders of
> magnitude. It’s increased more than 35 orders of magnitude.
>
> Hi Mel,
>
> The gain is just shy of 29 orders of magnitude. 2^128 / 2^32 =
> 7.9*10^28.
>
> There are 2^128 = 3.4*10^38 IPv6 addresses, but that isn't 38 "orders
> of magnitude." Orders of magnitude describes a difference between one
> thing and another, in this case the IPv4 and IPv6 address spaces.
>
>
> Using a /64 for P2P links is no problem, really. Worrying about that
> is like a scuba diver worrying about how many air molecules are
> surrounding the boat on the way out to sea.
>
> It's not a problem, exactly, but it cuts the gain vs. IPv4 from ~29
> orders of magnitude to just 9 orders of magnitude. Your link which
> needed at most 2 bits of IPv4 address space now consumes 64 bits of
> IPv6 address space.
>
> Then we do /48s from which the /64s are assigned and we lose another
> 3 or so orders of magnitude... Sparsely allocate those /48s for
> another order of magnitude. From sparsely allocated ISP blocks for
> another order of magnitude. It slips away faster than you might
> think.
>
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin
>
>
> --
> William Herrin ................
> herrin () dirtside com<mailto:herrin () dirtside com>
> bill () herrin us<mailto:bill () herrin us>
> Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>