On Jan 19, 2008, at 12:55 PM, William Herrin wrote:
On Jan 19, 2008 11:48 AM, Andy Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There's some debate in RIPE land right now that discusses, "what
actually is the automatic, free, right to PI" ? Every other network
in the world pays the cost when someone single homes but wants
their /
24 prefix on everyone else's router. If one had to pay a registry
for PI, then small networks would have to think about the negative
externalities of their decision to deploy using PI.
There was some related work on ARIN PPML last year. The rough numbers
suggested that the attributable economic cost of one IPv4 prefix in
the DFZ (whether PI, PA or TE) was then in the neighborhood of $8000
USD per year.
I haven't seen that work, but I am guessing this number is an
aggregate (i.e. every cost to everyone on the 'Net combined), not per-
network? See, I'm just looking at that TWO BILLION DOLLARS PER YEAR
number and thinking to myself, "um, yeah, right". :)
So, given that there are 27206 ASes in the table (latest CIDR report),
that means it costs each AS, on average, less than $0.30/year to
accept a prefix. I'm thinking that billing each new network with its
own prefix would cost more than $0.30/recipient.
Let's make it easy. Let's say only 8K ASNs actually take a full
table. (Rest have partial tables or two defaults or something.) So
each network needs $1/year per prefix. I still think the billing
infrastructure would cost more than the bill itself.
But then, the telcos have been in that situation for a century. Why
shouldn't the Internet follow in their footsteps?
Feel free to explain how confused I am. (But be warned, I am not
going to believe it costs $2B/year to run a multi-homed network with
two full feeds. :)
--
TTFN,
patrick