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. I would think multiple times before making that jump. Hence my suggestion to set up a separate organization to request IPv6 space, and thus not 'endanger' whatever I had before.
Owen DeLong wrote (on Wed, Apr 07, 2010 at 02:06:54PM -0700): > 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? > > Owen > > On Apr 7, 2010, at 1:59 PM, John Palmer (NANOG Acct) wrote: > > > Yah, thats what we are thinking here. We'll probably stick with IP4 only. > > > > Sounds like ARIN has set a trap, so that virtually any contact with them > > will result in the ceding of legacy rights. > > We'll be sure to avoid any such contact. > > Thanks everyone for the info. > > > > John > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Greco" <jgr...@ns.sol.net> > > To: "Owen DeLong" <o...@delong.com> > > Cc: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 3:31 PM > > Subject: Re: ARIN IP6 policy for those with legacy IP4 Space > > > > > >> 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 stands, there > >> isn't that much reason to do IPv6, and a significant disincentive in the > >> form of the fees. > >> ... JG > >> -- > > > > > -- _________________________________________ Nachman Yaakov Ziskind, FSPA, LLM aw...@ziskind.us Attorney and Counselor-at-Law http://ziskind.us Economic Group Pension Services http://egps.com Actuaries and Employee Benefit Consultants