[arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-3: Tiny IPv6 Allocations for ISPs

Kevin Kargel kkargel at polartel.com
Fri Apr 5 12:41:41 EDT 2013

I am still trying to figure out how having one *additional* database entry costs $1000/year.


-----Original Message-----
From: arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net [mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net] On Behalf Of Seth Mattinen
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 11:37 AM
To: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2013-3: Tiny IPv6 Allocations for ISPs

On 4/5/13 9:31 AM, David Farmer wrote:
> On 4/5/13 11:24 , Seth Mattinen wrote:
>> On 4/4/13 3:53 PM, David Farmer wrote:
>>> If the lower ones go a way then, as was said no one in their right 
>>> mind would choose /36 or /40.  I can't imagine anything smaller, I 
>>> just don't see room for more changes one the smaller side.  At least 
>>> without changing the IPv6 architecture and the /64 subnet standard, 
>>> and that would be a big enough change that a whole bunch of 
>>> assumptions need to change not just this one.
>> I would want to see verbiage in the policy that would immediately 
>> revoke/revert it if any fee schedule changes are made. If we're going 
>> to start making policy based on the fees then we should have to rerun 
>> them through the them the PDP anytime the fees they are based on change.
> I'm not going to include that right now but I will raise that question 
> at the Barbados meeting.

I see no reason to have a policy motivated strictly by fees to remain after fee changes that may or may not negate it, and to determine that it should go back through the PDP. Otherwise we're just cluttering the NRPM with irrelevant policy.

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:
Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list