[address-policy-wg] 2005-01 - Last Call for Comments (HD-ratio Proposal)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-01 - Last Call for Comments (HD-ratio Proposal)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-01 - Last Call for Comments (HD-ratio Proposal)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Randy Bush
randy at psg.com
Wed Feb 22 22:35:26 CET 2006
> I was also surprised by this number when I first saw it in the output. > > Looking behind this 46% number, the outcome is a result of the amplified > effects of the HD Ratio for large allocations. 50% of this increased > address consumption is in allocations of /9 and /10 prefixes, which only > account for 1% of all actual allocations, but 20% of the allocated addresses. > > The other effect is a shift from /16 to /15 allocations in this HDR regime > - /16s and /15s together contribute a further 15% to this increased address > consumption. i.e., this is what the conservatives and smaller folk have been intuiting all along, the big players get more than a fair (as we think of it today) share and the small folk lose. grrrrrrrr. could we please add ppml at arin.net to the cc:s? thanks. randy
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-01 - Last Call for Comments (HD-ratio Proposal)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-01 - Last Call for Comments (HD-ratio Proposal)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]