[155292] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 End User Fee
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Pitcock)
Fri Aug 3 21:01:52 2012
In-Reply-To: <5FE1FB6D43B8A647BBC821840C1AEA8BCCD5@ocsbs.ocosa.com>
From: William Pitcock <nenolod@systeminplace.net>
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 20:00:52 -0500
To: "Otis L. Surratt, Jr." <otis@ocosa.com>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Hi!
On Aug 3, 2012, at 6:32 PM, "Otis L. Surratt, Jr." <otis@ocosa.com> wrote:
> By end user I mean hosting clients (cloud, collocation, shared, dedicated,=
VPS, etc.) of any sort. For example you have clients that would need....say=
/24 for their dedicated server. If you charge a $1.00/IP which is typical t=
hen you would lose that revenue if they converted to IPv6. If you didn't cha=
rge for IPv4 then you have nothing to to lose.=20
>=20
A possible revenue-recovery model would be to charge say $2 per IP for servi=
ces below a certain resource threshold, for example 1gb vps or larger get fr=
ee IPs and dedicated servers get free IPs. This helps to increase margin as=
some people will upgrade to more expensive plans to get the free IPv4s. In=
hosting you can just issue /128s on ipv6 and require upgrades to get larger=
allocations.
William
> Otis
>=20
> ________________________________
>=20
> From: Cutler James R [mailto:james.cutler@consultant.com]
> Sent: Fri 8/3/2012 3:48 PM
> To: Otis L. Surratt, Jr.
> Cc: NANOG list
> Subject: Re: IPv6 End User Fee
>=20
>=20
>=20
> On Aug 3, 2012, at 3:22 PM, "Otis L. Surratt, Jr." <otis@ocosa.com> wrote:=
>> Anyone charging end users for IPv6 space yet? :p
>>=20
>> <snip/>
>> Otis
>>=20
>=20
> I can't imagine that this would be anything but counterproductive. End us=
ers are not interested in IPv6 - most would not recognize IPv6 if it fell ou=
t of their screen. End users want working connectivity, not jargon.=20
>=20
> James R. Cutler
> james.cutler@consultant.com
>=20
>=20
>=20
Sent from my Sprint iPhone=
