[arin-ppml] IPv6 /32 minimum for extra-small ISP

Gary T. Giesen ggiesen at akn.ca
Mon Apr 26 15:20:07 EDT 2010

On Mon, 2010-04-26 at 14:36 -0400, Wolfpaw - Dale Corse wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On
> > Behalf Of Gary T. Giesen
> > Sent: Monday, April 26, 2010 12:28 PM
> > To: Ted Mittelstaedt
> > Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv6 /32 minimum for extra-small ISP
> > 
> > We're only talking about ISPs here, not end users. Their raison d'être
> > is to provide network services (and one would hope that would include
> > IPv6). It's pretty late in the game at this point to have not at least
> > sold management that IPv6 needs to be deployed. I think being ready for
> > IPv6 is justification enough (it's coming whether you like it or not).
> > And $1250 is a pretty small price to pay.
> > 
> > My $0.02.
> > 
> I have to chime in here too - $1,200 is still $1,200 - certainly a
> significant invoice here. A 50% cost increase over the current 'solution' -
> especially on a recurring basis is going to hinder adoption IMHO. I would be
> pleased to offer customers IPv6 - currently our carriers are just running it
> in beta - however doubling the cost of IP space would certainly make us more
> inclined not to bother until it becomes operationally unavoidable... the
> customers are certainly not going to pay us extra for something the majority
> probably don't even understand, so why would we burn the cash unless we have
> a need?

Another bonus for the really small ISPs (the ones most impacted by this)
is that they're probably using PA space. A good sell for paying for PI
IPv6 is that they will never have to renumber again. Ever. That's pretty
cheap insurance.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list