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

Antoine Beaupré anarcat at koumbit.org
Wed Mar 27 16:29:57 EDT 2013

On 2013-03-27, William Herrin wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 2:20 PM, ARIN <info at arin.net> wrote:
>> Draft Policy ARIN-2013-3
>> Tiny IPv6 Allocations for ISPs
>> Part 1 brings ARIN's allocation policies in line with the upcoming fee
>> schedule so that it is possible to qualify as every level of ISP while
>> holding IPv6 number resources.
> This looks like a billing policy problem. The technical (i.e. number
> policy) case for a smaller-than-/32 ISP allocation seems weak to me.
> IMO, this problem could (and should!) be solved by billing
> organizations with both IPv4 and IPv6 addresses only for the IPv4
> addresses until IPv6 is prevalent enough to support its own costs.
> ARIN's board is -supposed- to optimize billing policy for the sake of
> technically sound number policy, not the other way around.

I agree with this. A /48 is .. really small (in the IPv6). ADSL
providers basically give this away to their customers here in

As an aside, am I correct in thinking that we currently need to pay only
the higher of the IPv4 vs IPv6 fee when we have two allocations with

We are looking into enabling IPv6 here, but if it means extra annual
fees, well that's a limit for adoption for us. We are currently using a
/21 from ARIN, and would look at a /36 for IPv6.


Man really attains the state of complete humanity when he produces,
without being forced by physical need to sell himself as a commodity.
                        - Ernesto "Che" Guevara
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20130327/5d250a57/attachment-0001.sig>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list