Re: questions about ARIN ipv6 allocation

[John Curran]

Owen - 

Correct - ARIN will not allow you to bring non-legacy resources under 
an LRSA agreement. 

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers


> On 4 Dec 2021, at 9:59 PM, Owen DeLong  wrote:
> 
> I would be more than happy to consilolidate my ipv6 addresses under my lrsa, 
> but ARIN will not allow it. 
> 
> Owen
> 
> 
>> On Dec 4, 2021, at 17:43, John Curran  wrote:
>> 
>>  Yes Owen, that is correct…
>> 
>> If an organization insists on maintaining multiple contractual relationships 
>> with ARIN (for whatever reason) then they will be billed for each relation 
>> separately - and that is indeed likely to be more than having a single 
>> consolidated agreement for all number resources.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> /John
>> 
>> John Curran
>> President and CEO
>> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>> 
>>> On Dec 4, 2021, at 7:09 PM, Owen DeLong  wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Dec 4, 2021, at 8:59 AM, John Curran  wrote:
 
 Just for clarity - ARIN’s fee schedule is such that ISP customers (i.e. 
 those with registration service plans) pay an annual services fee based on 
 their higher category of IPv4 or IPv6 resources – i.e. those with IPv4 
 resources can obtain a corresponding size of IPv6 resources without any 
 change in size category or increase in their annual fee. 
 
 [Also worth noting - as of January 2022, all end-user customers are moving 
 to the same registration services plan, and similarly those with just IPv4 
 number resources be able to obtain corresponding IPv6 resources without 
 change to their annual fee.]
>>> 
>>> This, whether they want to or not… In many cases resulting in significant 
>>> unwanted fee increases, especially if you have a mix of resources covered 
>>> under RSA and LRSA due to ARIN’s accounting limitations that they are 
>>> perversely disincentivized against fixing because it allows them to 
>>> essentially double-bill.
>>> 
>>> Owen
 
>>> 

Re: questions about ARIN ipv6 allocation

[Owen DeLong via NANOG]

I would be more than happy to consilolidate my ipv6 addresses under my lrsa, 
but ARIN will not allow it. 

Owen


> On Dec 4, 2021, at 17:43, John Curran  wrote:
> 
>  Yes Owen, that is correct…
> 
> If an organization insists on maintaining multiple contractual relationships 
> with ARIN (for whatever reason) then they will be billed for each relation 
> separately - and that is indeed likely to be more than having a single 
> consolidated agreement for all number resources.
> 
> Thanks,
> /John
> 
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
> 
>>> On Dec 4, 2021, at 7:09 PM, Owen DeLong  wrote:
>>> 
>> 
>> 
 On Dec 4, 2021, at 8:59 AM, John Curran  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Just for clarity - ARIN’s fee schedule is such that ISP customers (i.e. 
>>> those with registration service plans) pay an annual services fee based on 
>>> their higher category of IPv4 or IPv6 resources – i.e. those with IPv4 
>>> resources can obtain a corresponding size of IPv6 resources without any 
>>> change in size category or increase in their annual fee. 
>>> 
>>> [Also worth noting - as of January 2022, all end-user customers are moving 
>>> to the same registration services plan, and similarly those with just IPv4 
>>> number resources be able to obtain corresponding IPv6 resources without 
>>> change to their annual fee.]
>> 
>> This, whether they want to or not… In many cases resulting in significant 
>> unwanted fee increases, especially if you have a mix of resources covered 
>> under RSA and LRSA due to ARIN’s accounting limitations that they are 
>> perversely disincentivized against fixing because it allows them to 
>> essentially double-bill.
>> 
>> Owen
>>> 
>> 

Re: questions about ARIN ipv6 allocation

[John Curran]

Yes Owen, that is correct…

If an organization insists on maintaining multiple contractual relationships 
with ARIN (for whatever reason) then they will be billed for each relation 
separately - and that is indeed likely to be more than having a single 
consolidated agreement for all number resources.

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers

On Dec 4, 2021, at 7:09 PM, Owen DeLong  wrote:



On Dec 4, 2021, at 8:59 AM, John Curran  wrote:

Just for clarity - ARIN’s fee schedule is such that ISP customers (i.e. those 
with registration service plans) pay an annual services fee based on their 
higher category of IPv4 or IPv6 resources – i.e. those with IPv4 resources can 
obtain a corresponding size of IPv6 resources without any change in size 
category or increase in their annual fee.

[Also worth noting - as of January 2022, all end-user customers are moving to 
the same registration services plan, and similarly those with just IPv4 number 
resources be able to obtain corresponding IPv6 resources without change to 
their annual fee.]

This, whether they want to or not… In many cases resulting in significant 
unwanted fee increases, especially if you have a mix of resources covered under 
RSA and LRSA due to ARIN’s accounting limitations that they are perversely 
disincentivized against fixing because it allows them to essentially 
double-bill.

Owen

Re: questions about ARIN ipv6 allocation

[Owen DeLong via NANOG]

> On Dec 4, 2021, at 8:59 AM, John Curran  wrote:
> 
> Just for clarity - ARIN’s fee schedule is such that ISP customers (i.e. those 
> with registration service plans) pay an annual services fee based on their 
> higher category of IPv4 or IPv6 resources – i.e. those with IPv4 resources 
> can obtain a corresponding size of IPv6 resources without any change in size 
> category or increase in their annual fee. 
> 
> [Also worth noting - as of January 2022, all end-user customers are moving to 
> the same registration services plan, and similarly those with just IPv4 
> number resources be able to obtain corresponding IPv6 resources without 
> change to their annual fee.]

This, whether they want to or not… In many cases resulting in significant 
unwanted fee increases, especially if you have a mix of resources covered under 
RSA and LRSA due to ARIN’s accounting limitations that they are perversely 
disincentivized against fixing because it allows them to essentially 
double-bill.

Owen
> 

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Nick Hilliard]

Jaap Akkerhuis wrote on 04/12/2021 21:13:

Similar ideas where held for MD and TM but didn'y seem to work
out. Furthermore, an indepent Bougainville mighs change the name
to something else (as Zimbabwe did).


this is not unusual: .tp became one of the shortest-lived cctlds, and 
was dropped in favour of .tl.  Apparently, there are two hard problems 
facing newly-create states: cash invalidation and naming things.


Nick

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Jaap Akkerhuis]

 "John Levine" writes:

 > It appears that Jay R. Ashworth  said:
 > >Well, sure, but with the copper deposit measured in double-digit billions, 
 > >it seems sane to assume they've got a plan there...
 >
 > It's been 30 years.  We can hope but I wouldn't hold my breath.
 >
 > >Though given .TV's benefits to Tuvalu, and the number of Scandahoovian 
 >
 > You misspelled Dutch.
 >
 > >businesses that are BVs...
 >
 > Quite a while ago I met a guy at an ICANN meeting who'd made a deal with
 > American Samoa to sell .AS domains since AS is the corporate abbreviation in
 > several European countries.  It went nowhere, the Samoans took it back.

Similar ideas where held for MD and TM but didn'y seem to work
out. Furthermore, an indepent Bougainville mighs change the name
to something else (as Zimbabwe did).

jaap

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Cynthia Revström via NANOG]

It does seem like the rest of the story to me.
If the government said no, then that is pretty much it, that is the
end of the story regardless of what reason given. (Assuming that it
was done correctly and that laws regarding it don't change that is)

-Cynthia

On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 5:35 PM Jay R. Ashworth  wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Bjørn Mork" 
>
> > The rest of the story is here:
> > https://www.norid.no/en/aktuelt/plans-to-utilize-bv-shelved-en/
>
> Sadly, that's not really The Rest... Of The Story.  Sounds like the
> government regulator nixed it, giving *no reason at all*.
>
> Cheers,
> -- jra
> --
> Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink   
> j...@baylink.com
> Designer The Things I Think   RFC 2100
> Ashworth & Associates   http://www.bcp38.info  2000 Land Rover DII
> St Petersburg FL USA  BCP38: Ask For It By Name!   +1 727 647 1274

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Cynthia Revström via NANOG]

On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 5:03 PM Carsten Bormann  wrote:
>
> On 2021-12-04, at 16:18, Cynthia Revström via NANOG  wrote:
> >
> > I think pretty much all codes ending in an X is because there were no
> > better ones available. (I am not certain on this part though)
>
> I don’t think the Mexicans would agree :-)

Oh oops, not sure how I forgot about that one, I just thought about
ax, cx, and sx.

> .bx (Benelux) is reserved only, but it is another counter-example.

I am really nitpicking here but I believe BX is one of the cases of
not being a ccTLD but just ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code for some other
reason (seemingly for trademark/IP reasons in this case).

-Cynthia

Re: .bv ccTLD

[John Levine]

It appears that Jay R. Ashworth  said:
>Well, sure, but with the copper deposit measured in double-digit billions, 
>it seems sane to assume they've got a plan there...

It's been 30 years.  We can hope but I wouldn't hold my breath.

>Though given .TV's benefits to Tuvalu, and the number of Scandahoovian 

You misspelled Dutch.

>businesses that are BVs...

Quite a while ago I met a guy at an ICANN meeting who'd made a deal with
American Samoa to sell .AS domains since AS is the corporate abbreviation in
several European countries.  It went nowhere, the Samoans took it back.

R's,
John

Re: questions about ARIN ipv6 allocation

[John Curran]

Just for clarity - ARIN’s fee schedule is such that ISP customers (i.e. those 
with registration service plans) pay an annual services fee based on their 
higher category of IPv4 or IPv6 resources – i.e. those with IPv4 resources can 
obtain a corresponding size of IPv6 resources without any change in size 
category or increase in their annual fee.

[Also worth noting - as of January 2022, all end-user customers are moving to 
the same registration services plan, and similarly those with just IPv4 number 
resources be able to obtain corresponding IPv6 resources without change to 
their annual fee.]

None of the above is a comment or recommendation one way or the other one what 
address space to use for your US datacenter; it’s solely for clarity regarding 
the ARIN cost side.

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers


On 4 Dec 2021, at 12:06 AM, David Guo via NANOG 
mailto:nanog@nanog.org>> wrote:

Both options work, there’s no need to pay additional fee to ARIN unless you 
need something like unblock some websites. You can of course use RIPE IP and 
ASN in United Sates.

xTom GmbH

From: NANOG 
mailto:nanog-bounces+david=xtom@nanog.org>>
 on behalf of Edvinas Kairys 
mailto:edvinas.em...@gmail.com>>
Sent: Saturday, December 4, 2021 4:44:58 AM
To: NANOG Operators' Group mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
Subject: questions about ARIN ipv6 allocation

Hello,

We're setting up IPv6 network is USA. Our company has branches and different 
legal entities in EU and US. We've some ipv6 PI subnets already allocated by 
RIPE for EU datacenters. I have few questions:

1) Is it possible to reuse some portion of RIPE allocated ipv6 addresses in USA 
? Or we need to ask for the new ones by requesting in ARIN ?
2) Can i request in ARIN just ipv6 subnets for USA DCs, but to use the same AS 
number which was allocated by RIPE in EU ?

Thanks

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Jay R. Ashworth]

- Original Message -
> From: "Bjørn Mork" 

> The rest of the story is here:
> https://www.norid.no/en/aktuelt/plans-to-utilize-bv-shelved-en/

Sadly, that's not really The Rest... Of The Story.  Sounds like the
government regulator nixed it, giving *no reason at all*.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink   j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think   RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates   http://www.bcp38.info  2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA  BCP38: Ask For It By Name!   +1 727 647 1274

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Hank Nussbacher]

On 04/12/2021 00:45, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:

My favorite youtuber has just pointed out that Bougainville will separate
formally from Papua New Guinea in 2027, which, surprisingly, is only 5 or 6
years from now.

So I looked up .bv, and of course... it's assigned to Bouvet Island, an
uninhabited island whose political superior says anything that might go in
that TLD will go in .no instead. [Wikipedia]

So, what's the actual status of .bv?  Assigned, or reserved?  And if it
is reserved at the 3166 secretariat level, can they reassign it?

NORID might try to make a case that BV is the common corporate abbreviation
in their political subdivision... but they're not selling those domains now,
so that doesn't seem compelling.

Anyone here got a buddy on the secretariat?  :-)

Cheers,
-- jra


All handling of ccTLDs are handled via the ccNSO of ICANN:
https://ccnso.icann.org/en

For example ccTLD retirement is a multi-year and perhaps multi-decade 
process:

https://ccnso.icann.org/sites/default/files/field-attached/ccpdp3-retirement-vote-report-05aug21-en.pdf
https://community.icann.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=64081623=/64081623/166266006/Final%20Report%20ccPDP3%20Retirement%20-%20June%202021.pdf

Regards,
Hank

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Bjørn Mork]

Jaap Akkerhuis  writes:

> SIDN and NORID once considered to market .BV together:
> 

The rest of the story is here:
https://www.norid.no/en/aktuelt/plans-to-utilize-bv-shelved-en/


Bjørn

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Carsten Bormann]

On 2021-12-04, at 16:18, Cynthia Revström via NANOG  wrote:
> 
> I think pretty much all codes ending in an X is because there were no
> better ones available. (I am not certain on this part though)

I don’t think the Mexicans would agree :-)
.bx (Benelux) is reserved only, but it is another counter-example.

Grüße, Carsten

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Jay R. Ashworth]

- Original Message -
> From: "Jaap Akkerhuis" 

> It is no makred as reserved but assigned.

So this sentence in the wikipedia article:

"The domain remains reserved for potential future use. "

speaks from the viewpoint of NORID, not of the MA.  Got it.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth  Baylink   j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think   RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates   http://www.bcp38.info  2000 Land Rover DII
St Petersburg FL USA  BCP38: Ask For It By Name!   +1 727 647 1274

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Jay Ashworth]

Oh dear. They actually gave them .SS?

Wow.

On December 4, 2021 10:18:26 AM EST, "Cynthia Revström"  wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Not only is the ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code assigned but the ccTLD is
>delegated to NORID's nameservers.
>NORID also makes it pretty clear that they are not interested in
>selling the TLD, and I suspect that might very well mirror the
>position of the Norwegian government.
>While something like another country is a different thing to just a
>company wanting to profit from a TLD, it still seems unlikely to me.
>
>Another example: back in 2011 when South Sudan gained independence,
>they got an ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code which was "SS" which could
>understandably have some problems given historical context for that
>letter combination.[1]
>
>So not getting "BV" is a pretty minor thing in comparison to that, IMHO.
>There are many countries/geographical entities that have far from
>perfect ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes.
>I think pretty much all codes ending in an X is because there were no
>better ones available. (I am not certain on this part though)
>
>[1]: 
>https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sudan-independence-idUSTRE75S4A520110629
>
>-Cynthia
>
>On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 12:17 PM Jaap Akkerhuis  wrote:
>>
>>  "Jay R. Ashworth" writes:
>>
>>  > - Original Message -
>>  > > From: "David Conrad" 
>>  >
>>  > > Jay,
>>  > >
>>  > > On Dec 3, 2021, at 4:46 PM, Jay Ashworth  wrote:
>>  > >> In general I could I understand that, but it is my understanding that 
>> the domain
>>  > >> is still marked reserved at the Secretariat,
>>  > >
>>  > > Sorry, which secretariat?  As far as I know, the official status of ISO 
>> 3166-1
>>  > > Alpha 2 codes is specified by the ISO-3166 Maintenance Agency and 
>> listed on the
>>  > > ISO website (the “online browsing platform” output for BV being the URL 
>> I
>>  > > provided).
>>  >
>>  > The ISO 3166 secretariat, yes.
>>
>> It is no makred as reserved but assigned.
>>
>> jaap

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Cynthia Revström via NANOG]

Hi,

Not only is the ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code assigned but the ccTLD is
delegated to NORID's nameservers.
NORID also makes it pretty clear that they are not interested in
selling the TLD, and I suspect that might very well mirror the
position of the Norwegian government.
While something like another country is a different thing to just a
company wanting to profit from a TLD, it still seems unlikely to me.

Another example: back in 2011 when South Sudan gained independence,
they got an ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code which was "SS" which could
understandably have some problems given historical context for that
letter combination.[1]

So not getting "BV" is a pretty minor thing in comparison to that, IMHO.
There are many countries/geographical entities that have far from
perfect ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 codes.
I think pretty much all codes ending in an X is because there were no
better ones available. (I am not certain on this part though)

[1]: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sudan-independence-idUSTRE75S4A520110629

-Cynthia

On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 12:17 PM Jaap Akkerhuis  wrote:
>
>  "Jay R. Ashworth" writes:
>
>  > - Original Message -
>  > > From: "David Conrad" 
>  >
>  > > Jay,
>  > >
>  > > On Dec 3, 2021, at 4:46 PM, Jay Ashworth  wrote:
>  > >> In general I could I understand that, but it is my understanding that 
> the domain
>  > >> is still marked reserved at the Secretariat,
>  > >
>  > > Sorry, which secretariat?  As far as I know, the official status of ISO 
> 3166-1
>  > > Alpha 2 codes is specified by the ISO-3166 Maintenance Agency and listed 
> on the
>  > > ISO website (the “online browsing platform” output for BV being the URL I
>  > > provided).
>  >
>  > The ISO 3166 secretariat, yes.
>
> It is no makred as reserved but assigned.
>
> jaap

RE: private 5G networks?

[Jean St-Laurent via NANOG]

Maybe the main argument is: run a Pegasus free 5g/lte network.

Mr. Besos was hack by that and it's probably a technical way to start
protecting customers against that kind of sophisticated spywares that spread
in the normal mobile network.

I might be wrong and probably Pegasus can still perfectly run in a private
5G network?

Jean

Re: questions about ARIN ipv6 allocation

[Owen DeLong via NANOG]

> On Dec 3, 2021, at 12:44 PM, Edvinas Kairys  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> We're setting up IPv6 network is USA. Our company has branches and different 
> legal entities in EU and US. We've some ipv6 PI subnets already allocated by 
> RIPE for EU datacenters. I have few questions:
> 
> 1) Is it possible to reuse some portion of RIPE allocated ipv6 addresses in 
> USA ? Or we need to ask for the new ones by requesting in ARIN ?

Generally, you are free to do either.

> 2) Can i request in ARIN just ipv6 subnets for USA DCs, but to use the same 
> AS number which was allocated by RIPE in EU ?

Yes.

Owen

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Jaap Akkerhuis]

 "Jay R. Ashworth" writes:

 > - Original Message -
 > > From: "David Conrad" 
 >
 > > Jay,
 > > 
 > > On Dec 3, 2021, at 4:46 PM, Jay Ashworth  wrote:
 > >> In general I could I understand that, but it is my understanding that the 
 > >> domain
 > >> is still marked reserved at the Secretariat,
 > > 
 > > Sorry, which secretariat?  As far as I know, the official status of ISO 
 > > 3166-1
 > > Alpha 2 codes is specified by the ISO-3166 Maintenance Agency and listed 
 > > on the
 > > ISO website (the “online browsing platform” output for BV being the URL I
 > > provided).
 >
 > The ISO 3166 secretariat, yes.

It is no makred as reserved but assigned.

jaap

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Jaap Akkerhuis]

 David Conrad writes:

 > Jay,
 >
 > On Dec 3, 2021, at 4:46 PM, Jay Ashworth  wrote:
 > > In general I could I understand that, but it is my understanding that =
 > the domain is still marked reserved at the Secretariat,
 >
 > Sorry, which secretariat?

I'm curious about that secretariat as well.


 > As far as I know, the official status of ISO 
 > 3166-1 Alpha 2 codes is specified by the ISO-3166 Maintenance Agency and 
 > listed on the ISO website (the "Conline browsing platform"
 > output for BV being the URL I provided).

For a one page overview, see the brosing table at

Re: .bv ccTLD

[Jaap Akkerhuis]

 Sabri Berisha writes:

 > - On Dec 3, 2021, at 2:45 PM, Jay R. Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
 >
 > Hi,
 >
 > > NORID might try to make a case that BV is the common corporate abbreviation
 > > in their political subdivision... 
 >
 > Same for .nl. Most people on this list will be familiar with AMS-IX BV.
 >

SIDN and NORID once considered to market .BV together:


jaap