[arin-ppml] V6 address allocation policy
gbonser at seven.com
Tue Jan 19 15:37:47 EST 2010
> Leo> So, let's try this again. Will your manager approve $0?
> Cost of 10.0.0.0/24 = $0.
> Cost of IPv6, > $0.
As an end user, I recently (mistakenly) asked for and received a /48
(should have been larger).
> Amount owed for this approval: $1250
It cost us $1250 notwithstanding the fact we already have a /21 IPv4
I had to get justification for that spending. There was some pushback
in some areas and it went something like this:
Q: Why do we need this?
A: IPv4 addresses are running out and we are growing. Some of our
partners/peers are IPv6 capable.
Q: I have been hearing that for the past 10 years.
A: Yes but it really, really, really, is this time.
Then we get a /48 which we got based on a lack of understanding of IPv6
practices (we thought IPv6 practice was a /56 per site and not a /48 per
site) which led to
I need to go back and get more address space, I don't know if it is
going to cost us more or not.
Q: We are growing fairly rapidly, is ARIN going to nickel and dime us to
death with requiring us to keep coming back for more of these?
A: Probably. They seem pretty tight-fisted on address allocation,
still, but there is some policy discussion aimed at simplifying that and
allowing larger initial block assignments.
Turns out in subsequent discussion with ARIN that I will be able to get
a /45 (asked for a /44 but a /45 meets my needs so that is what they
will give me) as I believe a /45 is still a "small" allocation, I think
I can simply have the /48 upgraded to a /45 and not pay the fee again as
the initial /48 was never placed into service.
More information about the ARIN-PPML