[arin-ppml] Preemptive IPv6 assignment
On 10/12/2010 11:02 AM, Michael Richardson wrote:
> There are many discussions about how giving out address space does not
> cause deployment. I agree that is is true for ISPs, which is largely
> who is involved in ARIN, and who care about routing table sizes.
> It is not the same situation for enterprises.
> Please see debate about non-connected IPv6 allocations starting about a
> year ago.
> Few enterprises have any reason to deploy IPv6 today. While the smart
> ones go and get some address space from a tunnel broker and use that as
> their "site-local" address space, this doesn't work for everyone.
> (We had a long conversation about ULA-Random, and why it also doesn't
> suit everyone).
> An enterprise which currently pays no fees to ARIN: either because they
> have no resources (or because they were an early adopter last time, and
> they have only Legacy resources), can not make a business case for
> getting IPv6 space. Even that ridiculously low cost of $1250 is hard.
Correct. They will use their IPv4 until it's worthless to connect to
the Internet any further, then they will start paying the $1,250.00 USD
Might I suggest that ARIN consider instituting MONTHLY billing for these
orgs? Perhaps sticking them for $150.00 a month instead of $1250 a
year? Remember the pointy-haired boss directed Dilbert to purchase a
new computer using about 20 separate PO's for under $500 because that
was his signing authority? Maybe the same thing would work here, using
the same principle?