[arin-discuss] Suggestion 2010.1 -- Initial Fee Waiver for IPv6 assignments to LRSA signatories

[Scott Leibrand]

On 2/5/2010 11:50 AM, Bob Atkins wrote:
> Given the enormous amount of IPv6 address space that is available I 
> don't understand why there would be the need for a rigorous, IPv4 
> level of review, which you seem to imply the need for a significant 
> amount of staff to handle such reviews. I would think that basic 
> delegation analysis would likely suffice and I do understand that some 
> personnel are necessary. However, its not like doling out another /32 
> to /22 IPv6 allocation is going to have much of an impact on the 
> reserves of IPv6 space.
>
> With our /32 IPv6 allocation, I don't expect to need another IPv6 
> allocation until we have grown about 1000 times larger than we are 
> which, (sadly) is unlikely to occur in my lifetime.  :-( I suspect 
> that this would be the case for virtually all regional ISPs the world 
> over leaving just a handful of very large telcos that may need another 
> allocation after their initial /22 - perhaps by the year 2150...  ;-)
>
> Given the existing 'standard' that almost 99% of enterprise customers 
> have of using NAT for IPv4 based on the 'security' benefits that NAT 
> offers - we rarely assign much more than a /29 of IPv4 space to our 
> enterprise customers. The typical IT geek is often horrified by the 
> idea of having 'real' IP address space internally. While we ISPs are 
> being asked to head down the IPv6 path, I find it likely that we may 
> end up using _/*microscopic*/_ amounts of it assigned to customer 
> router interfaces that just want to NAT everything internally to 
> private IPv4 space. I don't think I'm alone in this observation and I 
> really think that it may be /_*decades*_/ before IPv6 utilization 
> rises to the level of present day IPv4 utilization so I kinda doubt 
> there are going to be very many additional IPv6 allocation requests 
> any time in the next say, 20 or 30 years.

Bob (and everyone else),

If you're not already, I would encourage you to participate in the 
public policy process, which sets the policy 
(https://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#six) for how rigorous the 
requirements are for getting IPv6 space.  There are a number of policy 
proposals and draft policies under consideration 
(https://www.arin.net/policy/proposals/) that would simplify those 
requirements.  Your participation 
(https://www.arin.net/participate/how_to_participate.html) would be 
highly valuable in considering whether to adopt those changes, and for 
considering any other policy ideas you might have.

Thanks,
Scott
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/attachments/20100205/b3cac16b/attachment.html>