[arin-ppml] [arin-discuss] x-small IPv4 ISPs going to IPv6

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at ipinc.net
Fri Apr 30 20:17:43 EDT 2010

On 4/30/2010 3:52 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> Ted,
> 	I attempted to present some numerical facts for the community's
> consideration. I was not pushing one position or the other, merely
> providing the results of research.
> 	There are 866 x-small IPv4 ISPs that do not have IPv6.
> 	Those are the current set of providers that could be subject
> to a meaningful fee waiver beyond 2012.
> 	As things currently stand, the 50% fee waiver for them would
> make IPv6 free for 2011 and 2012 anyway, since 50% of 2250 is
> more than the $1,000 difference between what they pay for IPv4
> now and what they would pay for IPv6. Thus, they would still pay
> the larger of $1,250 (what they pay now) and $1,125 (50% of the
> IPv6 fees).

Right, that is what I've advocated in the past.  The current fee
waiver for IPv6 goes to 25% next year then 0% the year after, however.

> 	If we want to consider an extended or permanent fee waiver
> for those organizations, the maximum possible impact to ARIN
> revenue would be a waiver of up to $866,000 (with adjustment
> for new x-small organizations that might get added).

Yes, but you failed to mention that this is offset against
the additional $866,000 that ARIN would take in if all those
orgs for IPv6 with no waiver.

> 	I'm neither speaking for or against such a waiver at this time,
> merely trying to provide a clear view of the facts and potential
> impacts of such a waiver and the number of organizations that
> could benefit from such a waiver.

But ultimately there are no impacts (financial at any rate)

As I thought I explained, the "missing" .8 Mil is something that
if nothing is done, is additional fees ARIN will make in the future
when the x-smalls are forced to go to IPv6.

If something is done, then ARIN does not make those additional fees
and instead merely makes the same fees they are making now.

Also since ARIN is duty-bound to return that .8 Mil in the form of
fee DECREASES then the real argument is this, do we want the
ultimate revenue ARIN takes in to NOT increase as a result of IPv6
or do we want it to DECREASE so we all (ISPs who are NOT x-smalls)
can get a nice break on our own fees?

You made it sound like the community is losing money if we do a
waiver which is definitely not the case.  The transition to IPv6
means more numbers handed out to the same fishes,
which due to the current fee structure results in a bonus for
ARIN.  It does not increase the number of fishes and as you have
constantly harped on in the past ARIN sets fees based on how
many fishes they have to keep track of, not how much IP numbers
they have handed out.  So if your going to be consistent with
what you have beaten me over the head with in the past, you should not 
be making the financials seem like a revenue loss to continue
to do a IPv6 waiver for the x-small IPv4 set.

With financials it's all in the presentation.


> Owen

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list