[ppml] those pesky users...

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at ipinc.net
Tue Mar 27 16:02:47 EDT 2007

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of
>Howard, W. Lee
>Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 9:07 AM
>To: Johnson, Ron; ppml at arin.net
>Subject: Re: [ppml] those pesky users...
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
>> Behalf Of Johnson, Ron
>> Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 1:55 PM
>> To: ppml at arin.net
>> Subject: Re: [ppml] those pesky users...
>> If ARIN were in fact offering an exchange program where we
>> would receive vastly increased sized IPv6 allocations for a
>> greatly reduced fee over the IPv4 blocks. A case could be
>> made on the economics of changing to v6.
>How vast?  How great?
>ARIN has been waiving fees for IPv6 allocations for members [1]
>for several years.  That waiver expires at the end of this year.
>Fees for IPv6 assignments are all-but-waived, at $500; same
>As an ISP, the minimum allocation you would receive is a /32 [2];
>as an end-user, the minimum assignment would be a /48 [3].
>What more can we do?

Lee, ARIN and the other RIR's need to admit a huge mistake was made
over the IPv6 allocations and then go forward with correcting it.

What you should have done was for ALL ipv4 assignments you should have
AUTOMATICALLY made an IPv6 assignment of a number block.  This would have
eliminated the silly "fee for IPv4" and "fee for IPv6" different rate
schedules.  There would only be one fee for "IP addressing" that would
never go away and never change whether you were using IPv4 or IPv6 or both.
It would have allowed people that wanted to experiment to just look up their
IPv6 allocation and start announcing them, without the bother of contacing
a number authority and going through an allocation scheme.

For example when the telephone companies switched from 7 digit to 10
digit dialing in this area, they just told everyone to start dialing the
area code.  So you immediately knew what both your 7 digit and your 10
digit telephone number was.

What the RIRs did was basically equivalent to the telephone company
announcing that due to the need to go to 10 digit dialing, they were
going to change every telephone number in the book to something
completely unlike what the prior number was.

It is no wonder that there's so little interest in switching over.  What
ARIN and the other registries did was change the focus on trying to
propagandize people into requesting IPv6 allocations, instead of where
it should be - telling every single organization that has IPv4 that
Bang, you automatically have IPv6, and then propagandizing people into
USING the IPv6 allocations.

NOTE (substitute "marketing" "encouraging" "advertising" or your preferred
politically correct synonym in place of "propagandizing", same difference)

The best thing going forward would be for ARIN and the other RIR's to
drop the IPv4 and IPv6 fee schedules (the wavier is a joke anyway, what
is the point of an IPv6 fee schedule with a fee of $0) and replace it
with a single IP allocation fee schedule that applies to both kinds of
numbering, then for all current IPv4 holders that the numbering authorities
have assigned numbering for, just go ahead and assign IPv6 allocations
at a 1 to 1 ratio.  (for every single IPv4 address you get an IPv6 address)
It's not like there's any shortage of IPv6.

You could probably do that in a year.

Then what you do is get rid of the separate IPv4 and IPv6 numbering requests
and replace them with a single numbering request that is used for both IPv4
and IPv6.  Then just adjust the justification requirements so that IPv6
hardly has any, and IPv4 has harder requirements - that way, organizations
that only need IPv6 will just leave the IPv4 justification requirements
blank, and only get IPv6.


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list