[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RIPE our of IPv4



Thatâ??s a one-time fee for end-users (and it can be as low as $250 unless you need a /40 or more).

If youâ??re an ISP, then yes, itâ??s $500 per year if you need a /40 or more (or as little as $250 if you can
get buy on less than a /40).

Owen


> On Dec 1, 2019, at 17:23 , Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at> wrote:
> 
> I get $500, not $150, when I read the price list.
> 
> On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 4:06 PM Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com <mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
> Youâ??re saying that there are two networks that are of sufficient complexity/size/whatever to require PA addressing, yet lack the resources for $150/year in registration fees?
> 
> I suppose itâ??s not impossible, but Iâ??m wondering how they afford the other expenses associated with maintaining such a network.
> 
> Owen
> 
> 
>> On Nov 30, 2019, at 09:00 , Matthew Kaufman <matthew at matthew.at <mailto:matthew at matthew.at>> wrote:
>> 
>> I administer two networks that use legacy IPv4 blocks (one also uses an allocation from the 44 net)
>> 
>> Both could have IPv6 if it was free, but neither organization has the funds to waste on a paid IPv6 allocation.
>> 
>> We should have given every legacy block matching free IPv6 space, because early adopters are still sometimes early adopters. 
>> 
>> But youâ??re right, what could have been supported on a volunteer basis is now a profit center. Especially for IPv6, which is once-and-done if sized properly.
>> 
>> Matthew Kaufman
>> 
>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 2:29 PM <bzs at theworld.com <mailto:bzs at theworld.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> If the commitment really was to spread IPv6 far and wide IPv6 blocks
>> would be handed out for free, one per qualified customer (e.g., if you
>> have an IPv4 allocation you get one IPv6 block free), or perhaps some
>> trivial administrative fee like $10 per year.
>> 
>> But the RIRs can't live on that.
>> 
>> We have put them under the management of a group of five organizations
>> which are very dependent on the income from block allocations and no
>> doubt were hoping IPv6 allocations would be a boon since there will be
>> very little if any income growth from future IPv4 block allocations.
>> 
>> Worse, once acquired an IPv6 block has so many billions of addresses
>> very few if any would ever need another allocation so it would hardly
>> act as a loss leader.
>> 
>> I realize many still would not deploy IPv6 for various reasons such as
>> their equipment doesn't support it or they don't have the in-house
>> expertise to support it, etc tho I can't think of much other etc, a
>> few points of resistance do come up.
>> 
>> -- 
>>         -Barry Shein
>> 
>> Software Tool & Die    | bzs at TheWorld.com <mailto:bzs at TheWorld.com>             | http://www.TheWorld.com <http://www.theworld.com/>
>> Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD       | 800-THE-WRLD
>> The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20191202/455d521f/attachment.html>