<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=iso-8859-1"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Mar 28, 2013, at 10:01 , John Curran <<a href="mailto:jcurran@arin.net">jcurran@arin.net</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
<div>
<div>On Mar 28, 2013, at 10:03 AM, Brian Jones <<a href="mailto:bjones@vt.edu">bjones@vt.edu</a>> wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite"><font><span class="gI">Maybe not so much <font>from the <font>
billing perspective, but from the <font>deployment perspective. Allocations of IPv6 addresses should be consistent with and a
<font>proponent of </font>a deploy<font><font>ment</font> methodology that allows
<font>for easy expansion of networks without additional allocations and associated costs.</font></font></font></font></font></span></font></blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<div>Brian - </div>
<div> </div>
<div> Under the present fee schedule, the smallest ISPs pay $1250 per </div>
<div> year if they have IPv4 and $1687 per year if they have IPv6 (the</div>
<div> fee is set to the maximum of your IPv4 fee and IPv6 annual fee. </div>
<div> It is correct that the IPv6 allocation for these ISPs has been a /32.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> Under the revised fee schedule (as corrected), and with this policy</div>
<div> change, the smallest ISPs will be in XX-Small (if they only have</div>
<div> /22 IPv4 and /40 of IPv6) with $500 annual fee or X-Small (if they </div>
<div> have larger than /22 IPv4 and up to /36 of IPv6) with $1000/year fee.</div>
<div> </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>I believe that should read "or up to /36 of..."</div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
<div> On the actual Pending Fee Table (corrected), it looks like this:</div>
<div>
</div></div></blockquote><br><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><table summary="ISP / Allocations Initial Registration or Annual Fees by service category" id="allocations" style="margin: 1.5em 0px 1em !important; padding: 0px; border: 2px solid rgb(153, 153, 153); font-size: 10px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); border-collapse: collapse; border-spacing: 0px; width: 598px; -webkit-box-shadow: rgb(204, 204, 204) 3px 3px 3px; box-shadow: rgb(204, 204, 204) 3px 3px 3px; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; line-height: 16px; position: static; z-index: auto; ">
<tbody style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; background-color: transparent; ">
<tr style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, 50% 100%, 50% 0%, from(rgb(240, 240, 240)), to(rgb(252, 252, 252))); background-color: rgb(237, 237, 237); ">
<th scope="col" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); font-size: 12px !important; background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, 50% 0%, 50% 100%, from(rgb(136, 136, 136)), to(rgb(170, 170, 170))); background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153); text-align: left; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); vertical-align: middle; ">
Service Category</th>
<th scope="col" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); font-size: 12px !important; background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, 50% 0%, 50% 100%, from(rgb(136, 136, 136)), to(rgb(170, 170, 170))); background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153); text-align: left; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); vertical-align: middle; ">
Initial Registration or Annual Fee<br>
(US Dollars)</th>
<th scope="col" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); font-size: 12px !important; background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, 50% 0%, 50% 100%, from(rgb(136, 136, 136)), to(rgb(170, 170, 170))); background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153); text-align: left; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); vertical-align: middle; ">
IPv4 Block Size</th>
<th scope="col" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.4em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); font-size: 12px !important; background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, 50% 0%, 50% 100%, from(rgb(136, 136, 136)), to(rgb(170, 170, 170))); background-color: rgb(153, 153, 153); text-align: left; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); vertical-align: middle; ">
IPv6 Block Size</th>
</tr>
<tr style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; ">
<td style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); font-size: 11.5px; text-align: left; vertical-align: top !important; ">
XX-Small</td>
<td align="right" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); font-size: 11.5px; text-align: left; vertical-align: top !important; ">
$500</td>
<td align="right" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); font-size: 11.5px; text-align: left; vertical-align: top !important; ">
/22 or smaller</td>
<td align="right" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); font-size: 11.5px; text-align: left; vertical-align: top !important; ">
/40 or smaller</td>
</tr>
<tr style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, 50% 100%, 50% 0%, from(rgb(240, 240, 240)), to(rgb(252, 252, 252))); background-color: rgb(237, 237, 237); ">
<td style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); font-size: 11.5px; background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, 50% 100%, 50% 0%, from(rgb(240, 240, 240)), to(rgb(252, 252, 252))); text-align: left; vertical-align: top !important; ">
X-Small</td>
<td align="right" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); font-size: 11.5px; background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, 50% 100%, 50% 0%, from(rgb(240, 240, 240)), to(rgb(252, 252, 252))); text-align: left; vertical-align: top !important; ">
$1,000</td>
<td align="right" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); font-size: 11.5px; background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, 50% 100%, 50% 0%, from(rgb(240, 240, 240)), to(rgb(252, 252, 252))); text-align: left; vertical-align: top !important; ">
Larger than /22, up to and including /20</td>
<td align="right" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0.5em 0.8em; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); font-size: 11.5px; background-image: -webkit-gradient(linear, 50% 100%, 50% 0%, from(rgb(240, 240, 240)), to(rgb(252, 252, 252))); text-align: left; vertical-align: top !important; ">
Larger than /40, up to and including /36</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div></div></blockquote><br><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div><blockquote type="cite"><font> Allocating blocks that encourage /56 allocations <font>from their <font>block </font></font>may not be the optimal solution for many in the long run.</font></blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<div> Any ISP that feels that way may obtain a /36, still be paying less than </div>
<div> today at $1000/year, and have significant room for /48 assignments. </div>
<div> Traditionally, this has been the type of decisions that each ISP makes</div>
<div> for themselves based on their market conditions and their perceived </div>
<div> customer needs, so providing the flexibility in policy for smaller IPv6</div>
<div> allocation makes sense unless the community feels it needs to decide</div>
<div> for those smaller ISPs on their behalf by not providing the policy option.</div>
<div><br></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></div>The problem is that it's more the end-users that feel that way than the<div>ISPs. The ISPs just want to spend as little as possible to deliver enough</div><div>that the end-users buy their products. To make matters worse, the end-</div><div>users mostly don't understand the technical nuance of the situation, so</div><div>they won't know enough to balk at undersized assignments. Unfortunately,</div><div>this means that product development will be driven by the assumptions</div><div>inherent in this undersized assignment world and we will never see</div><div>products that can take full advantage of how IPv6 is supposed to work.</div><div><br></div><div>If you want a concrete example, consider the number of applications for</div><div>IPv4 that have the following assumptions baked in:</div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>1.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Houses are behind NAT.</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>2.<span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Houses contain only 1 subnet and all devices on that subnet</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>can be discovered by means of subnet-local broadcast packets.</div><div><br></div><div>Neither of those assumptions is valid in a number of homes including</div><div>mine. Unfortunately, because these assumptions are baked into</div><div>numerous products, I am unable to use many of those products.</div><div>Examples include:</div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>TiVO App (iPad/iPhone)</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Yamaha Home Theater Remote (iPad/iPhone)</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>A number of other remote control Apps</div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>Certain features in Smart TVs and Blu Ray players</div><div><br></div><div>Thus, my concern is that creating misplaced economic incentives, while</div><div>well intentioned may cause tremendous harm in the long run.</div><div><br></div><div>Owen</div><div><br></div></body></html>