[arin-discuss] Size Categories for IPv6.

[Owen DeLong]

On Apr 18, 2011, at 1:45 PM, Mike Joseph wrote:

> Despite the complexity, I think they still make sense.  We will eventually see a dramatic decrease in IPv4 allocations (granted, a decade or more out), and with that, a drop off of the IPv4 ISP annual revenue.  That will leave only the IPv6 allocations (assignments will be less frequent) as a significant revenue stream.
> 
In general, this will be a 1:1 as the IPv4 subscription fees for most organizations are the same as their IPv6
fees.

> So if we went with a one-size-fits-all model for IPv6 ISP fees, the smaller ISPs would end up having to pay quite a bit more, I think.  It would be interesting to see how the numbers would work out for that.  Were we do adopt such a policy today, it means that the single IPv6 annual fee would probably be higher than the lower levels of the IPv4 fees, resulting in a fee increase to any network adopting IPv6.
> 
I don't think anyone has advocated a one-size-fits-all model.

Owen

> -MJ
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 8:00 PM, cja at daydream.com <packetgrrl at gmail.com> wrote:
> How do you feel about the size categories all together?  Do you think they still make sense in IPv6?  
> 
> Thanks !
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Brian Jankovich <bjankovich at vaultnetworks.com> wrote:
> I agree with the proposed pricing mode. Being that the /32 is the smallest a provider can get, it should be in the X-small category.
> 
>  
> Brian Jankovich
> 
> Vault Networks Hosting Services
> 
> http://www.vaultnetworks.com
> 
>  
> Direct: 305.735.8098 x210
> 
> Fax: 708.575.4280
> 
> Skype: brianvaultnet
> 
>  
> From: cja at daydream.com [mailto:packetgrrl at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 3:54 PM
> To: arin-discuss at arin.net
> Subject: [arin-discuss] Size Categories for IPv6.
> 
>  
> 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
> 
>  
> 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
> 
> IPV6 ANNUAL FEES (NOTE: FEE WAIVERS IN EFFECT)
> 
> 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.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/caff3013/attachment.html>