Next message: Patrick W. Gilmore: "Re: An Attempt at Economically Rational Pricing: Time Warner Trial"
On Jan 19, 2008, at 12:55 PM, William Herrin wrote:
> On Jan 19, 2008 11:48 AM, Andy Davidson <> 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
