[arin-ppml] IPv6 /32 minimum for extra-small ISP
Gary T. Giesen
ggiesen at akn.ca
Wed Apr 14 17:55:25 EDT 2010
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 17:39 -0400, NOC at ChangeIP.com wrote:
> Guys - stick to the question at hand... who cares about routing slots at the
> moment, let's address the pricing piece of it.
There two are somewhat interrelated. If ARIN offered smaller
allocations, that would affect the goal of massive aggregation (and
impact routing slots).
If they offered the same allocation (/32) at a discounted price for ISPs
who would have previously paid a lesser amount, the guys who actually
need /32's would argue for the same price and obviously have a
significant impact on ARIN's operating budget. Since ISPs are the only
ones affected by this, and in the grand scheme of things the cost of IP
space is but a tiny fraction of the vast majority of most ISP's ongoing
costs (we're talking about $2250, or the cost of a *one* CPE router, per
year), I'm inclined to say let the policy stand as it is.
> If IPv6 is not supposed to cost any more if your already assigned IPv4, then
> how can a small ISP get it without increased cost? The pricing schedule on
> arin.net lists x-small, but it's impossible to get, and the next size up is
> more than the x-small IPv4 pricing. Let's not argue and bicker about whos
> router has more routes and memory.
More information about the ARIN-PPML