ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space
john at sackheads.org
Thu Apr 8 08:57:56 CDT 2010
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. 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?
>>> 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 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.
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.
More information about the NANOG