[arin-discuss] Encouraging IPv6 Transition (From PPML)
owen at delong.com
Tue May 15 05:05:12 EDT 2012
On May 14, 2012, at 3:23 PM, Chris Grundemann wrote:
> On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>> I would oppose this unless you're also willing to waive IPv6 assignment fees that do not accompany an IPv4 resource application. I see no benefit to the community from requiring people to consume extra IPv4 just to get a free IPv6 assignment. (Well, actually, I do see a small benefit in exhausting IPv4 and getting on with transition faster, but, I don't think it's necessarily good stewardship).
> You're right Owen, I was over-simplifying. My fear is that a total fee
> waiver may hurt ARIN financially. Even free initial-assignments may
> cause harm.
I would welcome such a problem, frankly. I don't think that the end-user fees ARIN collects amount to much, especially from x-small organizations. Perhaps a $1,250 discount off of your initial IPv6 assignment would be a good start. (Though, frankly, I resent being punished for getting my IPv6 assignment early if this happens, but, I'll get over it.)
That way, if you're x-small, you get your first block(s) for free and if you're not, you pay something, but, quite a bit less.
> I don't have ARINs budget at my fingertips, perhaps a staffer can let
> us know how much it might cost to make initial IPv6 assignments (to
> end-users) free for a year and then half price for a year.
I'm sure John will either chime in shortly, or, have Bob do so. ;-)
> That would do two things: First, it lowers a potential barrier, pure
> cost of assignment. Second, it puts a touch of urgency on initial IPv6
> requests: "Hey boss, we have to at least get our assignment this year
> if we don't want to be forced to pay later..."
Agreed. I will point out that some years ago, there was a partial waiver for IPv6 assignments. I only paid $500 for mine at that time.
>> Sent from my iPad
>> On May 14, 2012, at 3:03 PM, Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> IMO 1A and 2A might usefully go together as a carrot + stick approach. A little extra attestation work in exchange for a "get v6 free with your v4" offer should encourage v6 adoption without increasing the overall time+cost burden on the orgs applying for space.
>>> On May 14, 2012, at 10:53 AM, Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Four ideas to promote IPv6 deployment, for your consideration and discussion:
>>>> 1) Make it as easy as possible for an org who actually wants IPv6 to
>>>> get it. This is mostly in place today (allocation fee waivers, one
>>>> maint. fee per Org ID, ease of qualification, etc.) but there is still
>>>> some possible room for improvement:
>>>> 1A) Waive IPv6 assignment fees for end-users who request both IPv4
>>>> and IPv6 simultaneously.
>>>> 1B) Move the </40 small/x-small threshold to <=/48.
>>>> 2) Provide additional motivation for orgs to request and deploy IPv6.
>>>> There are several top of mind methods to accomplish this:
>>>> 2A) Require the officer attestation to acknowledge the current
>>>> state of affairs regarding IPv4 exhaustion and IPv6 requirements.
>>>> 2B) Continue or even ramp up (especially targeting end users) ARINs
>>>> outreach efforts (which have been substantial in previous years but
>>>> are being wound down post IANA-exhaustion).
>>>> 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:
>>>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>>> 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:
>>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
More information about the ARIN-discuss