Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-12 Thread John Curran
On Apr 12, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Joe Greco wrote: Further, given the purported role that InterNIC played, exchange of value as a prerequisite is a rather questionable position to rely on; InterNIC had motivations other than a purely financial one to organize IP allocations. The number

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-12 Thread Joe Greco
On Apr 12, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Joe Greco wrote: Further, given the purported role that InterNIC played, exchange of value as a prerequisite is a rather questionable position to rely on; InterNIC had motivations other than a purely financial one to organize IP allocations. The number

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-12 Thread William Herrin
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 11:23 AM, John Curran jcur...@arin.net wrote: On Apr 12, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Joe Greco wrote: Further, given the purported role that InterNIC played, exchange of value as a prerequisite is a rather questionable position to rely on; InterNIC had motivations other than a

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-12 Thread David Conrad
John, On Apr 12, 2010, at 5:23 AM, John Curran wrote: On this matter we do agree, since allocations prior to ARIN's formation were generally made pursuant to a US Government contract or cooperative agreement. As we're both aware, Jon was funded in part via the ISI Teranode Network

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-12 Thread Gordon Cook
David, in 1997 and 1998 I was spending about 25% of my time interview the principals and engaged in informal conversations with Ira Magaziner,Kim Hubbard, DonMitchell and others. I was in Londone in late jan 1998 when Jon tried to redirect the root. Magaziner was there and daniel karenburg

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-12 Thread Seth Mattinen
On 4/9/10 5:27 AM, Joe Greco wrote: ARIN might not have a contract with us, or with other legacy holders. It wasn't our choice for ARIN to be tasked with holding up InterNIC's end of things. However, it's likely that they've concluded that they better do so, because if they don't, it'll

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-11 Thread Owen DeLong
On Apr 11, 2010, at 9:17 AM, Joe Greco wrote: Put less tersely: We were assigned space, under a policy whose purpose was primarily to guarantee uniqueness in IPv4 numbering. As with other legacy holders, we obtained portable space to avoid the technical problems associated with

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-11 Thread David Conrad
Owen, On Apr 11, 2010, at 6:39 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: Instead, we have a situation where the mere mention of requiring legacy holders to pay a token annual fee like the rest of IP end-users in the ARIN region leads to discussions like this. I don't believe the issue is the token annual fee.

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-11 Thread Owen DeLong
On Apr 11, 2010, at 11:21 AM, David Conrad wrote: Owen, On Apr 11, 2010, at 6:39 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: Instead, we have a situation where the mere mention of requiring legacy holders to pay a token annual fee like the rest of IP end-users in the ARIN region leads to discussions like

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-11 Thread David Conrad
On Apr 11, 2010, at 9:03 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: Well, if they want to operate under the previous regime, then, they should simply return any excess resources now rather than attempting to monetize them under newer policies as that was the policy in place at the time. Why? There were no

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-11 Thread William Herrin
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 7:08 PM, John Curran jcur...@arin.net wrote: On Apr 11, 2010, at 3:20 PM, David Conrad wrote: When most of the legacy space was handed out, there were no restrictions on what you could do/not do with address space simply because no one considered it necessary.  I don't

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-10 Thread Brandon Ross
On Fri, 9 Apr 2010, William Herrin wrote: Fun movies notwithstanding, they generally issue a fine and work it through the civil courts. And please educate me then, when I don't pay the fine, then what happens? -- Brandon Ross AIM: BrandonNRoss

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-10 Thread JC Dill
Dave Israel wrote: On 4/9/2010 12:30 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: Put differently, you work in this arena too... you've presumably talked to stakeholders. Can you list some of the reasons people have provided for not adopting v6, and are any of them related to the v6 policies regarding address

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Randy Bush
Because a legacy holder doesn't care about ARIN i do not think that statement is defensible there is a difference between caring and being willing to give up rights for no benefit

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Randy Bush
Excellent questions... The direction with respect to ARIN is that the Board has spent significant time considering this issue and the guidance provided to date is that ARIN is to focus on its core mission of providing allocation and registration services, and be supportive of other related

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Joe Greco
1) Justify why we need a heavy bureaucracy such as ARIN for IPv6   numbering resources, Because the members of ARIN (and the other four RIRs) want it that way. And because nobody has yet made a serious proposal to ICANN that would replace ARIN. Using the organization to justify the need

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Joe Greco
I have my doubts, based on a ~decade of observation. I don't think ARIN is deliberately evil, but I think there are some bits that'd be hard to fix. I believe that anything at ARIN which the community at large and the membership can come to consensus is broken will be relatively easy

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Martin Barry
$quoted_author = Joe Greco ; Using the organization to justify the need for the organization is circular reasoning. I would have thought the role ARIN (and the other RIRs) has to play is clear from it's charter (registration of number resources to ensure uniqueness and fair allocation of a

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Cian Brennan
On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 06:09:19AM -0500, Joe Greco wrote: 1) Justify why we need a heavy bureaucracy such as ARIN for IPv6   numbering resources, Because the members of ARIN (and the other four RIRs) want it that way. And because nobody has yet made a serious proposal to ICANN that

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Martin Barry
$quoted_author = Joe Greco ; Perhaps the true issue is that what you see as broken is perceived as working as intended by much of the community and membership? That's a great point. Would you agree, then, that much of the community and membership implicitly sees little value in IPv6?

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread TJ
In my experience ARIN/RIR policies have not been a noticeable barrier to IPv6 adoption. Lack of IA/security gear tops the list for my clients, with WAN Acceleration a runner-up. /TJ On Apr 9, 2010 7:23 AM, Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net wrote: I have my doubts, based on a ~decade of

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Randy Bush
The vast majority of people who need address space in North America are ARIN members. These ARIN members are happy with the current organisation. If the set of people who need IP address tend towards being happy with the current system, there is no reason to change it for a new system, which

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread John Curran
On Apr 8, 2010, at 4:35 PM, Joe Greco wrote: The problem, as I've heard it, is that ARIN's fees are steep in order to pay for various costs. Since there isn't the economy of scale of hundreds of millions of domain names, and instead you just have ... what? Probably less than a hundred

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Joe Greco
[context restored] If you don't have a contract with ARIN, why should ARIN provide you with anything? [I replied] Because a legacy holder doesn't care about ARIN i do not think that statement is defensible there is a difference between caring and being willing to give up rights

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread John Curran
On Apr 8, 2010, at 2:51 PM, Kevin Stange wrote: On 04/08/2010 01:47 PM, Dorn Hetzel wrote: If there was an automatic website that just handed out up to a /40 on demand, and charged a one-time fee of $100, I don't think the space would ever be exhausted, there isn't enough money. I'd hate

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread John Curran
On Apr 9, 2010, at 8:27 AM, Joe Greco wrote: Eventually InterNIC was disbanded, and components went in various directions. ARIN landed the numbering assignment portion of InterNIC. Along with that, maintenance of the legacy resources drifted along to ARIN. Correct (ARIN is the successor

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread John Curran
On Apr 9, 2010, at 9:58 AM, Curtis Maurand wrote: According to the docs that I read that's 1250 for the first year and 100/yr thereafter. The big boys pay more up front, but pay $100.00 per year thereafter. There's the competitive disadvantage. ATT, Comcast, Time-Warner pay $100.00/yr

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread todd glassey
On 4/8/2010 10:32 AM, Stephen Sprunk wrote: On 07 Apr 2010 18:40, N. Yaakov Ziskind wrote: I don't think the issue is *money* (at least the big issue; money is *always* an issue), but rather the all-of-sudden jump from being unregulated to regulated, whatever that means. ARIN is not a

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Curtis Maurand
On 4/9/2010 10:10 AM, John Curran wrote: A large *end-user* pays maintenance fees of $100/year. ISPs pay an annual registration services subscription fee each year, proportional to the size of aggregate address space held. I stand corrected. I misunderstood the doc. I could never read.

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Owen DeLong
On Apr 9, 2010, at 4:09 AM, Joe Greco wrote: 1) Justify why we need a heavy bureaucracy such as ARIN for IPv6 numbering resources, Because the members of ARIN (and the other four RIRs) want it that way. And because nobody has yet made a serious proposal to ICANN that would replace ARIN.

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Owen DeLong
This is an answer though. The vast majority of people who need address space in North America are ARIN members. These ARIN members are happy with the current organisation. If the set of people who need IP address tend towards being happy with the current system, there is no reason to

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Owen DeLong
On Apr 9, 2010, at 4:39 AM, Martin Barry wrote: $quoted_author = Joe Greco ; Perhaps the true issue is that what you see as broken is perceived as working as intended by much of the community and membership? That's a great point. Would you agree, then, that much of the community and

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Owen DeLong
Put differently, you work in this arena too... you've presumably talked to stakeholders. Can you list some of the reasons people have provided for not adopting v6, and are any of them related to the v6 policies regarding address space? Reasons: + Fear People

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Dave Israel
On 4/9/2010 12:30 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: Put differently, you work in this arena too... you've presumably talked to stakeholders. Can you list some of the reasons people have provided for not adopting v6, and are any of them related to the v6 policies regarding address space?

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Owen DeLong
Put less tersely: We were assigned space, under a policy whose purpose was primarily to guarantee uniqueness in IPv4 numbering. As with other legacy holders, we obtained portable space to avoid the technical problems associated with renumbering, problems with in-addr.arpa subdelegation,

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Owen DeLong
On Apr 9, 2010, at 6:58 AM, Curtis Maurand wrote: On 4/8/2010 7:18 PM, Gary E. Miller wrote: Since I just need one /64 that is $1,250/yr for the /64. That puts me at a large competitive disadvantage to the big boys. According to the docs that I read that's 1250 for the first year and

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Owen DeLong
On Apr 9, 2010, at 7:30 AM, todd glassey wrote: On 4/8/2010 10:32 AM, Stephen Sprunk wrote: On 07 Apr 2010 18:40, N. Yaakov Ziskind wrote: I don't think the issue is *money* (at least the big issue; money is *always* an issue), but rather the all-of-sudden jump from being unregulated to

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread David Conrad
On Apr 9, 2010, at 2:34 AM, John Curran wrote: Another bright gentleman many years ago suggested that we have an online website which allows anyone to pay a fee and get an address block. This is not inconceivable, but does completely set aside hierarchical routing which is currently an

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread David Conrad
Owen, On Apr 9, 2010, at 7:07 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: No, ARIN is not a regulator. Regulators have guns or access to people with guns to enforce the regulations that they enact. ARIN has no such power. I'm a little confused on the distinction you're making. Today, ARIN can remove whois

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread David Conrad
On Apr 8, 2010, at 11:32 AM, Michael Dillon wrote: All ARIN fees are set by the ARIN members. No they are not. Regards, -drc

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread William Herrin
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote: On Apr 9, 2010, at 7:30 AM, todd glassey wrote: BULL SH*T, ARIN makes determinations as to how many IP addresses it will issue and in that sense it is exactly a regulator. No, ARIN is not a regulator.  Regulators have guns or

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Brandon Ross
On Fri, 9 Apr 2010, William Herrin wrote: Last I heard, the FCC has access to people with law degrees not guns. Much like ARIN, really. Oh really? So if I start using a frequency that requires a license and I don't have one, won't they tell me to stop? And if I say no, I won't stop, what

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread John Curran
On Apr 9, 2010, at 1:26 PM, David Conrad wrote: Doesn't end user PI assignment already do this? Note I'm not arguing against end user PI assignment policy, rather just making the observation that given IPv6 did not address routing scalability, the path we're heading down is obvious, the

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Stephen Sprunk
On 09 Apr 2010 12:34, David Conrad wrote: On Apr 9, 2010, at 7:07 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: No, ARIN is not a regulator. Regulators have guns or access to people with guns to enforce the regulations that they enact. ARIN has no such power. I'm a little confused on the distinction

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Brian Raaen
Unless the ip you takes belongs to the rbn, mafia, or a three letter government org. -- -- Brian Raaen Network Engineer bra...@zcorum.com On Friday 09 April 2010, Brandon Ross wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2010, William Herrin wrote: Last I heard, the FCC has access to people

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread William Herrin
On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Brandon Ross br...@pobox.com wrote: On Fri, 9 Apr 2010, William Herrin wrote: Last I heard, the FCC has access to people with law degrees not guns. Much like ARIN, really. Oh really?  So if I start using a frequency that requires a license and I don't have

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Stephen Sprunk
On 09 Apr 2010 12:43, William Herrin wrote: On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote: On Apr 9, 2010, at 7:30 AM, todd glassey wrote: BULL SH*T, ARIN makes determinations as to how many IP addresses it will issue and in that sense it is exactly a regulator.

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Curtis Maurand
On 4/9/2010 1:43 PM, William Herrin wrote: No, ARIN is not a regulator. Regulators have guns or access to people with guns to enforce the regulations that they enact. ARIN has no such power. The FCC is a regulator. The California PUC is a regulator. ARIN is not a regulator. Last I

RE: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Warren Bailey
in record time. -Original Message- From: Curtis Maurand [mailto:cmaur...@xyonet.com] Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 10:15 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space On 4/9/2010 1:43 PM, William Herrin wrote: No, ARIN is not a regulator. Regulators have

RE: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Schiller, Heather A (HeatherSkanks)
-Original Message- From: Joe Greco [mailto:jgr...@ns.sol.net] Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 4:14 PM To: John Payne Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space On Apr 8, 2010, at 11:36 AM, Joe Greco wrote: IPv6-only content won't be meaningful

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Michael Dillon
On 9 April 2010 18:36, David Conrad d...@virtualized.org wrote: On Apr 8, 2010, at 11:32 AM, Michael Dillon wrote: All ARIN fees are set by the ARIN members. No they are not. According to https://www.arin.net/fees/overview.html: The Fee Schedule, is continually reviewed by ARIN's

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Joel Jaeggli
On 04/09/2010 09:56 AM, Dave Israel wrote: +Bonus Uncertainty: There is a lack of consensus on how IPv6 is to be deployed. For example, look at the ongoing debates on point to point network sizes and the /64 network boundary in general. There's also no tangible benefit to deploying IPv6

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Joel Jaeggli
On 04/09/2010 11:01 AM, William Herrin wrote: Fun movies notwithstanding, they generally issue a fine and work it through the civil courts. If you were doing something extraordinary, like jamming emergency communications, I expect they might well call the police for assistance. But those

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Randy Bush
some nut i procmail wrote No, ARIN is not a regulator. Regulators have guns or access to people with guns to enforce the regulations that they enact. ARIN has no such power. I'm a little confused on the distinction you're making. confusion between the army and the fcc, who, even under

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Joel Jaeggli
On 04/09/2010 07:49 PM, Randy Bush wrote: some nut i procmail wrote No, ARIN is not a regulator. Regulators have guns or access to people with guns to enforce the regulations that they enact. ARIN has no such power. I'm a little confused on the distinction you're making. confusion

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Owen DeLong
On Apr 9, 2010, at 10:43 AM, William Herrin wrote: On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 1:07 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote: On Apr 9, 2010, at 7:30 AM, todd glassey wrote: BULL SH*T, ARIN makes determinations as to how many IP addresses it will issue and in that sense it is exactly a regulator.

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Owen DeLong
On Apr 9, 2010, at 10:34 AM, David Conrad wrote: Owen, On Apr 9, 2010, at 7:07 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: No, ARIN is not a regulator. Regulators have guns or access to people with guns to enforce the regulations that they enact. ARIN has no such power. I'm a little confused on the

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-09 Thread Bill Stewart
One really good thing about spam was that, before it became a big problem, all Usenet / Internet discussions had a risk of devolving into libertarians vs. socialists flamewars, but that got replaced by *%^%* spammers, and eventually we got that nice little checklist as a way to quiet even those

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Antonio Querubin
On Wed, 7 Apr 2010, Mark Keymer wrote: I guess I am confused. Don't you have to pay for IP4 space? I know I am still fairly new to things. So maybe I just don't get it. Legacy IPv4 holders have no obligation to ARIN until they sign an RSA. Antonio Querubin 808-545-5282 x3003 e-mail/xmpp:

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Owen DeLong
On Apr 8, 2010, at 1:14 AM, Antonio Querubin wrote: On Wed, 7 Apr 2010, Mark Keymer wrote: I guess I am confused. Don't you have to pay for IP4 space? I know I am still fairly new to things. So maybe I just don't get it. Legacy IPv4 holders have no obligation to ARIN until they sign an

Content via IPv4/IPv6 (was: Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space)

2010-04-08 Thread John Curran
On Apr 7, 2010, at 5:49 PM, David Conrad wrote: On Apr 7, 2010, at 10:52 AM, William Pitcock wrote: And when there are no eyeballs to look at your IPv4 content because your average comcast user is on IPv6? The chances of this actually occurring in our lifetime are so small as to be

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Joe Greco
On Apr 7, 2010, at 12:09 PM, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote: Was looking at the ARIN IP6 policy and cannot find any reference to those who have IP4 legacy space. Isn't there an automatic allocation for those of us who have legacy IP space. If not, is ARIN saying we have to pay

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Adrian Chadd
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010, Joe Greco wrote: 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

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Joe Greco
Joe Greco wrote: 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

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread John Payne
On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Joe Greco wrote: On Apr 7, 2010, at 12:09 PM, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote: Was looking at the ARIN IP6 policy and cannot find any reference to those who have IP4 legacy space. Isn't there an automatic allocation for those of us who have legacy IP space.

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread William Herrin
On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 6:31 PM, John Payne j...@sackheads.org wrote: Those with legacy IP4 space should have the equivalent IP6 space under the same terms. Or am I missing something? If you don't have a contract with ARIN, why should ARIN provide you with anything? Because ARIN is one of the

RE: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread David Hubbard
From: William Herrin [mailto:b...@herrin.us] It's like government services for the elderly. Though today many are a net drain on society, they've mostly earned their place with past action and it's the decent and charitable thing to do for the folks who created the possibility of the

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Joe Greco
On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:51 AM, Joe Greco wrote: On Apr 7, 2010, at 12:09 PM, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote: Was looking at the ARIN IP6 policy and cannot find any reference to those who have IP4 legacy space. Isn't there an automatic allocation for those of us who have legacy

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread N. Yaakov Ziskind
David Hubbard wrote (on Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 11:07:05AM -0400): From: William Herrin [mailto:b...@herrin.us] It's like government services for the elderly. Though today many are a net drain on society, they've mostly earned their place with past action and it's the decent and

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread TJ
IPv6-only content won't be meaningful for years yet, and IPv6-only eyeballs will necessarily be given ways to reach v4 for many years to come. To be fair - IPv6 only content may not exactly be commonplace, but there are IPv6-only networks out there ... they just tend to consist of things

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Joe Greco
Is this just an argument about the money? Or, are there other issues (you agree that we can revoke your allocation at any time, for any reason, as we see fit)? I'd be curious to know what the justification for such a policy would be under v6. Even if space were obtained under false pretenses,

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Owen DeLong
This assumes that small = /40 and large = /22. Still, with more realistic numbers: The small guy (/48) pays $0.019073486 per /64 The large guy (/24) pays $0.00032741808 per /64 FWIW. Owen On Apr 7, 2010, at 2:48 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 14:17:49 PDT, Gary

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Owen DeLong
On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:54 AM, TJ wrote: IPv6-only content won't be meaningful for years yet, and IPv6-only eyeballs will necessarily be given ways to reach v4 for many years to come. To be fair - IPv6 only content may not exactly be commonplace, but there are IPv6-only networks out

RE: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Lee Howard
-Original Message- From: Joe Greco [mailto:jgr...@ns.sol.net] It seems like you could run an RIR more cheaply by simply handing out the space fairly liberally, which would have the added benefit of encouraging v6 adoption. The lack of a need for onerous contractual clauses as

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread bmanning
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 09:54:21AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:54 AM, TJ wrote: IPv6-only content won't be meaningful for years yet, and IPv6-only eyeballs will necessarily be given ways to reach v4 for many years to come. To be fair - IPv6 only content may

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Stephen Sprunk
On 07 Apr 2010 16:17, Gary E. Miller wrote: On Wed, 7 Apr 2010, Owen DeLong wrote: If you are an end-user type organization, the fee is only $100/year for all your resources, IPv4 and IPv6 included. Is that really what you would call significant? As always, the devil is in the

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Stephen Sprunk
On 07 Apr 2010 18:40, N. Yaakov Ziskind wrote: I don't think the issue is *money* (at least the big issue; money is *always* an issue), but rather the all-of-sudden jump from being unregulated to regulated, whatever that means. ARIN is not a regulator. The jump is from not paying for services

RE: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Mr. James W. Laferriere
Hello Lee , On Thu, 8 Apr 2010, Lee Howard wrote: -Original Message- From: Joe Greco [mailto:jgr...@ns.sol.net] It seems like you could run an RIR more cheaply by simply handing out the space fairly liberally, which would have the added benefit of encouraging v6 adoption. The

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Mr. James W. Laferriere
Hello Stephen , On Thu, 8 Apr 2010, Stephen Sprunk wrote: On 07 Apr 2010 16:17, Gary E. Miller wrote: On Wed, 7 Apr 2010, Owen DeLong wrote: If you are an end-user type organization, the fee is only $100/year for all your resources, IPv4 and IPv6 included. Is that really what you

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Dan White
On 08/04/10 17:17 +, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: in the IPv4 space, it was common to have a min allocation size of a /20 ... or 4,096 addresses ... and yet this amnt of space was allocated to someone who only needed to address 3 servers... say six total out of a pool of

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Owen DeLong
On Apr 8, 2010, at 10:42 AM, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote: Hello Lee , On Thu, 8 Apr 2010, Lee Howard wrote: -Original Message- From: Joe Greco [mailto:jgr...@ns.sol.net] It seems like you could run an RIR more cheaply by simply handing out the space fairly liberally,

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread bmanning
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 12:50:26PM -0500, Dan White wrote: On 08/04/10 17:17 +, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: in the IPv4 space, it was common to have a min allocation size of a /20 ... or 4,096 addresses ... and yet this amnt of space was allocated to someone who

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Kevin Stange
On 04/08/2010 11:00 AM, Joe Greco wrote: Is this just an argument about the money? Or, are there other issues (you agree that we can revoke your allocation at any time, for any reason, as we see fit)? I'd be curious to know what the justification for such a policy would be under v6. Even

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Stephen Sprunk
On 08 Apr 2010 12:42, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote: Hello Lee , On Thu, 8 Apr 2010, Lee Howard wrote: -Original Message- From: Joe Greco [mailto:jgr...@ns.sol.net] It seems like you could run an RIR more cheaply by simply handing out the space fairly liberally, which would have

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread William Herrin
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Mr. James W. Laferriere bab...@baby-dragons.com wrote: And, really, even if the fee for your /48 (X-small category) assignment maintenance fee went up to $1250/yr to match the current allocation maintenance fee table, would that really be significant in the grand

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Joe Greco
-Original Message- From: Joe Greco [mailto:jgr...@ns.sol.net] It seems like you could run an RIR more cheaply by simply handing out the space fairly liberally, which would have the added benefit of encouraging v6 adoption. The lack of a need for onerous contractual clauses

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread joe mcguckin
This is a pretty boring topic. It's been argued many times over. I think the more interesting discussion is: - Where is ARIN and the RIR's headed? - What will ARIN look like 10 years from now? Mission creep seems to be pervasive in all organizations. ICANN with a headcount of over 100

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread William Herrin
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net wrote: With IPv6 designed the way it is, is there a realistic chance of running out of IPv6 even if some questionable delegations are made? Joe, You're aware that RIPE has already made some /19 and /20 IPv6 allocations? Yes, with

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Kevin Stange
On 04/08/2010 10:36 AM, Joe Greco wrote: 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

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread bmanning
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 02:22:29PM -0400, William Herrin wrote: On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Mr. James W. Laferriere bab...@baby-dragons.com wrote: And, really, even if the fee for your /48 (X-small category) assignment maintenance fee went up to $1250/yr to match the current allocation

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread bmanning
On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 11:29:25AM -0700, joe mcguckin wrote: This is a pretty boring topic. It's been argued many times over. I think the more interesting discussion is: - Where is ARIN and the RIR's headed? - What will ARIN look like 10 years from now? yuppers. this topic

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Dorn Hetzel
If there was an automatic website that just handed out up to a /40 on demand, and charged a one-time fee of $100, I don't think the space would ever be exhausted, there isn't enough money. On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Kevin Stange ke...@steadfast.net wrote: On 04/08/2010 10:36 AM, Joe Greco

Running out of IPv6 (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space)

2010-04-08 Thread Jeroen Massar
[changing topics, so that it actually reflects the content] On 2010-04-08 20:33, William Herrin wrote: On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:26 PM, Joe Greco jgr...@ns.sol.net wrote: With IPv6 designed the way it is, is there a realistic chance of running out of IPv6 even if some questionable delegations

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Kevin Stange
On 04/08/2010 01:47 PM, Dorn Hetzel wrote: If there was an automatic website that just handed out up to a /40 on demand, and charged a one-time fee of $100, I don't think the space would ever be exhausted, there isn't enough money. I'd hate to see that routing table. -- Kevin Stange Chief

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Dorn Hetzel
Well, yeah, but that is a separate problem. Anyone for an announced-prefix-tax ? :) On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Kevin Stange ke...@steadfast.net wrote: On 04/08/2010 01:47 PM, Dorn Hetzel wrote: If there was an automatic website that just handed out up to a /40 on demand, and charged a

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Owen DeLong
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Owen DeLong o...@delong.com wrote: What, exactly do you find so onerous in the LRSA? Owen, ARIN's unilateral right under the LRSA to reclaim my addresses in the event of a dispute bugs me a tad, as does similar verbiage sprinkled throughout. Let's

Re: Running out of IPv6 (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space)

2010-04-08 Thread Chris Grundemann
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 12:47, Jeroen Massar jer...@unfix.org wrote: [changing topics, so that it actually reflects the content] On 2010-04-08 20:33, William Herrin wrote: Yes, with suitably questionable delegations, it is possible to run out of IPv6 quickly. The bottom line (IMHO) is that

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread William Herrin
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:37 PM, bmann...@vacation.karoshi.com wrote: On Thu, Apr 08, 2010 at 02:22:29PM -0400, William Herrin wrote: On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Mr. James W. Laferriere        Try that fee while trying to make a living in a depressed econimic region JUST for an ipv4 /24

Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space

2010-04-08 Thread Joe Greco
Just because the benefit of being cautious isn't clear doesn't mean we should simply throw caution to the wind entirely and go back to the old ways. It seems clear to many now that a lot of the legacy allocations, /8's in particular were issued in a way that has left IPv4 inefficiently

Re: Running out of IPv6 (Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space)

2010-04-08 Thread David Conrad
On Apr 8, 2010, at 8:47 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote: [changing topics, so that it actually reflects the content] On 2010-04-08 20:33, William Herrin wrote: You're aware that RIPE has already made some /19 and /20 IPv6 allocations? Yes, with suitably questionable delegations, it is possible to

  1   2   >