Owen DeLong wrote:
As mergers of ASes increases the number of announcements and IPv4 addresses were allocated a lot earlier than those of IPv6, comparing the current numbers of announcements is not meaningful.
Mergers of ASes does not increase announcements in IPv4 nearly as much as slow-start and repeated expanding requests for additional IPv4 space have.
That *was* a factor, when increased number of subscribers meant more free addresses. Today, as /24 can afford hundreds of thousands of subscribers by NAT, only very large retail ISPs need more than one announcement for IPv4.
As a result, size of global routing table will keep increasing unless there are other factors to limit it.
Sure, but it’s very clear that the rate of increase for IPv6 appears to be roughly 1/8th that of IPv4,
It merely means IPv6 is not deployed at all by small ISPs and multihomed sites.
The reality is that IPv4 will never be completely disaggregated into /24s
You are so optimistic.
and IPv6 will never be completely disaggregated into /48s, so this is actually meaningless and not predictive in any way.
That IPv6 will be disaggregated into /40 or even /32 is disastrous.
There is no need for such motivation in IPv6 and better yet,
Then, in a long run, IPv6 will be disaggregated into /32 or /40.
since the two organizations have fully globally unique addresses deployed throughout their network, there's no risk of collisions in RFC-1918 space necessitating large renumbering projects to merge the networks.
You fully misunderstand why NAT is so popular today defeating IPv6. Even if two organizations are merged, sites of the organizations are, in general, not merged. As private address space behind NAT is used by each site independently, there is no renumbering occur for the private addresses. Masataka Ohta