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

[John Curran]

On Mar 28, 2013, at 7:45 AM, Brandon Ross <bross at pobox.com> wrote:
> 
> Which of these statements do I have wrong or is unclear:
> 
> 1. Under the new fee policy, an IPv4-only /22 holder will pay $500/year

Correct.
 
> 2. Under the new fee policy, and under the current allocation policy, an IPv4 /22 holder will pay $1000/year starting at the time that they receive IPv6 space because the minimum IPv6 allocation size puts them into x-small.

Also correct.  If the fee schedule xx-small category were to be fixed for
IPv6 to read ("/40 or smaller"), and this 2013-3 is adopted then there 
would be a more reasonable option for the very smallest ISPs.

> 3. $1000/year is double $500/year

Yes.

> 4. Some service providers will either not request IPv6 space or will return IPv6 space to set their costs at $500/year.

Correct.

> 5. As a community, it is bad to have incentives in place that encourage service providers to avoid requesting or return IPv6 address space

Agreed, and hence a very good reason for fixing the Pending Fee 
schedule which does not have a sensical xx-small IPv6 line at 
present.  That was my fault, and the correction is in progress.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
ARIN