[124973] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John Payne)
Thu Apr 8 09:58:40 2010
From: John Payne <john@sackheads.org>
In-Reply-To: <201004081251.o38Cpl5W017606@aurora.sol.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 09:57:56 -0400
To: Joe Greco <jgreco@ns.sol.net>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
>> On Apr 7, 2010, at 12:09 PM, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote:
>>=20
>>> Was looking at the ARIN IP6 policy and cannot find any reference to =
those who have
>>> IP4 legacy space.
>>>=20
>>> Isn't there an automatic allocation for those of us who have legacy =
IP space. If not, is ARIN
>>> saying we have to pay them a fee to use IP6? Isn't this a =
disincentive for us to move up to IP6?
>>>=20
>>> Those with legacy IP4 space should have the equivalent IP6 space =
under the same terms. Or
>>> am I missing something?
>>=20
>> If you don't have a contract with ARIN, why should ARIN provide you =
with anything?
>=20
> Because a legacy holder doesn't care about ARIN; a legacy holder has
> usable space that cannot be reclaimed by ARIN and who is not paying
> anything to ARIN. The point here is that this situation does not
> encourage adoption of IPv6, where suddenly there'd be an annual fee
> and a contract for the space. "ARIN" is incidental, simply the RIR
> responsible in this case.
Umm, ARIN should provide a legacy holder with IPv6 space because the =
legacy holder doesn't care about ARIN?
Legacy holders have been holding parts (possibly more than they would be =
able to justify from an RIR) of a finite global shared resource without =
sharing in the costs associated, and it's unfair to _them_ that they're =
not _entitled_ to do the same in the IPv6 space?
Yep, makes perfect sense to me. =20
If the "rest of the world" moving to IPv6 isn't enough encouragement for =
you, then bleh. I'm only interested in encouraging my employer and my =
providers. If you have no need to reach IPv6-only content or eyeballs, =
and you don't care about NAT or geolocation issues with centralized NAT =
or.... then sure, you have no encouragement or need to adopt IPv6. If =
you do need to reach IPv6-only content or eyeballs, then that is your =
encouragement to play in the same playing field as everyone else in your =
RIR-area.=
