<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
On 23 Apr 2021, at 10:03 AM, John Curran <<a href="mailto:jcurran@arin.net" class="">jcurran@arin.net</a>> wrote:<br class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div dir="auto" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div class="">...</div>
<div class="">For organizations that have obtained IPv6 resources from ARIN under a separate RSA, the two most common size allocations are /32 (generally issued to ISPs) and /28 (generally issued to organizations for their own use). </div>
<div class=""></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div dir="auto" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">The above sentence should read "For organizations that have obtained IPv6 resources from ARIN under a separate RSA, the two most common size allocations are /32 (generally issued to ISPs) and /48 (generally issued to organizations for their own
use)."</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<span style="font-style: normal;" class="">(i.e. <b class="">/48</b> not /28)</span></div>
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div dir="auto" style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class="">
<div class="">For those legacy resources holders with /16 blocks, I suspect that maintaining the separate LRSA with ARIN for legacy resource services and the applicable legacy fee cap will make the most sense (at least for the foreseeable future.) I’ve quickly
outlined the three most common cases below for your legacy IPv6 resource holders and believe them to be correct (although it has not been proofed by second set of eyes). I’ll note that all presume that that the organizations would not consolidate to a single
agreement with ARIN for reason noted above.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br class="">
</div>
As the table may not have been readable for some depending on their mail agent, I’ve quickly reformatted and attached as pdf. </div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>Best wishes,</div>
<div>/John</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div>
<div>John Curran</div>
<div>President and CEO</div>
<div>American Registry for Internet Numbers</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div><br class="">
</div>
<div></div>
</div>
</body>
</html>