[124929] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (N. Yaakov Ziskind)
Wed Apr 7 17:07:56 2010
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 17:05:49 -0400
From: "N. Yaakov Ziskind" <awacs@ziskind.us>
To: "John Palmer (NANOG Acct)" <nanog2@adns.net>
In-Reply-To: <68107E737FF84E2FB5409B1D516C022F@TAKA>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Reply-To: awacs@ziskind.us
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Just curious: why not set up a separate entity to apply for IPv6 space?
Do you get a cheaper fee (or other brownie points) if you already have
an allocation?
John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote (on Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 03:59:30PM -0500):
> Yah, thats what we are thinking here. We'll probably stick with IP4 only.
>
> Sounds like ARIN has set a trap, so that virtually any contact with them
> will result in the ceding of legacy rights.
>
> We'll be sure to avoid any such contact.
>
> Thanks everyone for the info.
>
> John
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joe Greco" <jgreco@ns.sol.net>
> To: "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.com>
> Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 3:31 PM
> Subject: Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space
>
> >It's not the initial assignment fee that's really an impediment, it's
> >moving from a model where the address space is free (or nearly so) to
> >a model where you're paying a significant annual fee for the space.
> >
> >We'd be doing IPv6 here if not for the annual fee. As it stands, there
> >isn't that much reason to do IPv6, and a significant disincentive in the
> >form of the fees.
> >
> >... JG
--
_________________________________________
Nachman Yaakov Ziskind, FSPA, LLM awacs@ziskind.us
Attorney and Counselor-at-Law http://ziskind.us
Economic Group Pension Services http://egps.com
Actuaries and Employee Benefit Consultants
