[arin-discuss] Size Categories for IPv6.

[Randy Carpenter]

I think it makes more sense than the current categories. 

Is there an easy way to determine how it would affect revenues from all current IPv6 holders? 

I also think it will warrant re-thinking if/when policy goes through to make allocations based on nibble boundaries. I think it would make the most sense in that case for each nibble boundary to be in its own category. 

-Randy 

-- 
| Randy Carpenter 
| Vice President - IT Services 
| Red Hat Certified Engineer 
| First Network Group, Inc. 
| (800)578-6381, Opt. 1 
---- 

----- Original Message -----

> There was a recent policy proposal (138) to try to change the size
> categories for IPv6 allocations. It was abandoned by the AC because
> it is a pricing matter but I wanted to start up a discussion here to
> perhaps give ARIN guidance as to how the community feels about
> changing the sizes.

> Currently the IPv6 size categories are

> IPv6 Annual FeeS (NOTE: FEE WAIVERS IN EFFECT) Size Category Fee (US
> Dollars) Block Size
> X-small 	$1,250 	smaller than /40
> Small 	$2,250 	/40 to /32
> Medium 	$4,500 	/31 to /30
> Large 	$9,000 	/29 to /27
> X-large 	$18,000 	/26 to /22
> XX-large 	$36,000 	/22 and larger The proposal was to change them as
> follows

> X-small /32 or smaller
> Small /31 to /30
> Medium /29 to /27
> Large /26 to /24
> X-large /23 to /20
> XX-large /20 and larger

> Thanks!
> ----Cathy
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20110418/b37c093c/attachment.html>