[arin-ppml] IPv6 Guarantee

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

   I think that it is imperative that the IPv4->IPv6
transition be as fee-neutral as possible.

   This is why the language here:

https://www.arin.net/fees/fee_schedule.html

"...ISPs with both IPv4 resources and IPv6 resources pay the larger of 
the two fees...."

because it causes a smooth transition from IPv4->IPv6
for most orgs from a fee standpoint, since as an org stops
using IPv4 and starts replacing it with IPv6, their
fees remain unchanged.

This allows the network admin to be removed from the
ROI discussions over IP addressing fees of the IPv4->IPv6
transition.  It removes some control of the corporate
beancounters over the network admin.

If ARIN were to ever attempt to do something like this
suggestion your going to merely succeed
in perking up the ears of the beancounters when they
hear or read about the word "fee refund".

Right now the admin has control since he can choose to
commence his IPv6 transition and thus avoid having to
shell out a cash-pile for IPv4 off the transfer market.
If he's doing what we want - transitioning to IPv6 -
the beancounters leave him alone.  They only make life
miserable for him if he's a laggard and has to go to them
for a cash-pile to buy IPv4 from the transfer market.

But this proposal is going to have the beancounters on
his neck whether he's doing what we want or not - they
are either going to be screaming at him for being a
laggard and wanting money for IPv4 off the transfer
market, or they are going to be screaming at him because
they want to be absolutely sure the are gonna get that
fee refund.  Since he's going to have them on his neck
either way, I think it really does disincentivize IPv6
deployment

Ted

On 4/27/2010 8:11 AM, Lee Howard wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----
>
>> From: William Herrin<bill at herrin.us>
>> To: arin-ppml at arin.net
>> Sent: Mon, April 26, 2010 10:41:22 PM
>> Subject: [arin-ppml] IPv6 Guarantee
>>
>> The IPv6 guarantee:  20% or it's free
>
> Interesting idea.  I like it for its novelty.  Don't know if I
> would actually support it yet.
> Does that disincentivize IPv6 deployment--if it happens, then
> fees go up?
>
>> Every January 1, ARIN will determine
>> whether at least 20% of typical
>> residential packets on ARIN-territory
>> Internet connections are carried
>> via IPv6, as reported by scientifically
>> defensible studies. If not,
>> all registrants who both hold IPv6 registrations
>> and route the
>> registered address blocks on the public Internet will receive a
>> full refund of any registration, maintenance or other ARIN fees incurred
>> in the prior year solely as a consequence of the IPv6
>> registration.
>
> I would assume we would use the ASCP Consultation Process
> to solicit proposals for studies.
>
> Lee
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.