[124926] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joe Abley)
Wed Apr 7 16:58:53 2010
From: Joe Abley <jabley@hopcount.ca>
In-Reply-To: <A0313F9B4ADF48489568E2F64D72B4A101312750@ASHEVS013.mcilink.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 16:58:15 -0400
To: "Schiller,
Heather A (HeatherSkanks)" <heather.schiller@verizonbusiness.com>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: jabley@hopcount.ca
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 2010-04-07, at 14:02, Schiller, Heather A (HeatherSkanks) wrote:
> ARIN Region IPv6 fee waiver:
> https://www.arin.net/fees/fee_schedule.html#waivers
>=20
> "In Jan 2008, the Board of Trustees decided to reduce the fee waiver
> incrementally over a period of 4 years. Full fees will be in effect in
> 2012."
>=20
> Can you provide rationalization why anyone should automatically get =
any
> kind of allocation? Or why legacy holders should "have equivalent
> [IPv6] space under the same terms" =20
- there is no address scarcity with IPv6 (at least not in the sense =
that there is with v4)
- there is no significant danger of unconstrained v6 RIB explosion when =
assigning PI prefix to people who already occupy at least one slot in =
the v4 table (the problem is constrained to be at worst as bad as we see =
with v4, which is a known ceiling)
- there's minimal administrative overhead in assigning PI space to =
people who are unlikely ever to come back to ask for more
- what administrative overhead there is is minimal if the process of =
justification is trivial (or automatic)
- ARIN says it is in the business of encouraging people to use v6
- people are more likely to use v6 if they can get v6 addresses easily =
and cheaply
So automatically assigning v6 addresses to people who have a history of =
advertising v4 prefixes seems like it has minimal cost (less cost than =
other assignment strategies, seems to me) minimal risk to the Internet =
and will encourage people to use v6.
What rationalisation can you provide for not doing this?
[I mention this just because you asked. I'm not trying to turn NANOG =
into PPML. I'd mention this on PPML instead, but past experience tells =
me that I have far too much real work to do every day to be able to =
follow that list, and posting to a list you don't read seems rude.]
Joe
(speaking as private individual, not in any other capacity)=
