[address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Vladimir Andreev
vladimir at quick-soft.net
Tue Jun 9 18:04:23 CEST 2015
Hi! Here: +---------+------+ | month | /22s | +---------+------+ | 2013-01 | 1 | | 2013-05 | 1 | | 2013-07 | 3 | | 2013-10 | 1 | | 2013-12 | 1 | | 2014-01 | 5 | | 2014-02 | 9 | | 2014-03 | 3 | | 2014-04 | 2 | | 2014-05 | 6 | | 2014-06 | 7 | | 2014-07 | 6 | | 2014-08 | 6 | | 2014-09 | 15 | | 2014-10 | 15 | | 2014-11 | 17 | | 2014-12 | 38 | | 2015-01 | 21 | | 2015-02 | 19 | | 2015-03 | 25 | | 2015-04 | 39 | | 2015-05 | 19 | | 2015-06 | 9 | +---------+------+ I see only single growth of transfers starting 09.2014. After that time transfer count is just oscillating up and down. 09.06.2015, 18:58, "Gert Doering" <gert at space.net>: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 06:51:01PM +0300, Vladimir Andreev wrote: >> > The reason for this policy is to make sure that the community keeps to >> > the *intent* of the "last /8" policy: ensure that newcomers in the market >> > will have a bit of IPv4 space available to number their translation gear >> > to and from IPv6. It will not completely achieve that, of course, but >> > make the obvious loophole less attractive. >> >> Earlier I already said that fast-trade takes away only 3% of last /8. >> >> Today Ciprian Nica showed that there is NO exponential grow of transfers from last /8 and also calculated that transferred IP's from last /8 represent only 1.83% of all transferred IP's. >> >> So what is this proposal about? > > The growth in trade is VERY clearly visible. > > With the limited amount of data available (since this effect only started > over the last year or so), you can fit about every curve you like into > it - exponential, linear, quadratic. None will be a very reasonable > projection. > > But it's actually good that only 3% of the last /8 has been fast-traded > away: let's keep it that way. > > Gert Doering > -- APWG chair > -- > have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? > > SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard > Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann > D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) > Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 -- With best regards, Vladimir Andreev General director, QuickSoft LLC Tel: +7 903 1750503
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2015-01 Draft Document and Impact Analysis Published (Alignment of Transfer Requirements for IPv4 Allocations)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]