> On Jul 10, 2015, at 9:52 AM, Owen DeLong <o...@delong.com> wrote: > > >>> On Jul 10, 2015, at 03:57 , Matthew Kaufman <matt...@matthew.at> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Jul 9, 2015, at 11:53 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 09 Jul 2015 23:33:25 -0700, Matthew Kaufman said: >>> >>>> One of the hopeful outcomes of IPv6 adoption was that an ISP could get >>>> enough to last "forever" in a single transaction. But "forever" isn't >>>> very long at one /48 (or more) per customer. >>> >>> How long does it take to blow through a /20 at /48 a customer? >> >> A while. But the more likely case is that the guy before you asked for and >> got a /32, because that's the minimum (and already two steps up the fee >> scale, I might add) >> >> You want ISPs to start with /20s? I'll support that over on PPML if you >> propose it. But I'll also ask for /20 to have a fee category of "small". >> >> Matthew Kaufman >> >> (Sent from my iPhone) > > According to https://www.arin.net/fees/fee_schedule.html > > ISP / ALLOCATIONS INITIAL REGISTRATION OR ANNUAL FEES > Service Category Initial Registration or Annual Fee > (US Dollars) IPv4 Block Size IPv6 Block Size > XX-Small $500 /22 or smaller /40 or smaller > X-Small $1,000 Larger than /22, up to and including /20 Larger > than /40, up to and including /36 > Small $2,000 Larger than /20, up to and including /18 Larger than > /36, up to and including /32 > Medium $4,000 Larger than /18, up to and including /16 Larger > than /32, up to and including /28 > Large $8,000 Larger than /16, up to and including /14 Larger than > /28, up to and including /24 > X-Large $16,000 Larger than /14, up to and including /12 Larger > than /24, up to and including /20 > XX-Large $32,000 Larger than /12 Larger than /20 > > > If your IPv4 ISP fits in a /22 or smaller, you can hand out /48s from a /32 > for a very long time. > (maximum 1024 customer end-sites with no addresses reserved for your > own infrastructure, /32 = 65535 customer > end sites after reserving a /48 for your infrastructure) > If your IPv4 ISP fits in a /20 or smaller, you can hand out /48s from a /32 > for a pretty long time. > (maximum 4096 customer end-sites with no addresses reserved for your > own infrastructure, /32 = 65535 customer > end sites after reserving a /48 for your infrastructure) > If your IPv4 ISP fits in a /18 or smaller, you can hand out /48s from a /32 > for quite a while. > (maximum 16,384 customer end-sites with no addresses reserved for your > own infrastructure, /32 = 65535 customer > end sites after reserving a /48 for your infrastructure). > > At IPv6 /18 or smaller, you’re in the same fee category as an IPv6 /32. > > As you go up, the situation only gets better… > > If your ISP uses an IPv4 /16, then you have a maximum of 65,536 customers > with no allowance for infrastructure. > For free, you can get an IPv6 /28. This allows you 16,777,215 /48 end sites > with a /48 reserved for your infrastructure. > > If your ISP uses an IPv4 /14, then you have a maximum of 262,144 customers > with no allowance for infrastructure. > For free, you can get an IPv6 /24 to support up to 268,435,455 /48 end sites > after reserving a /48 for infrastructure. > > Sure, Matthew is going to point out that my maximum IPv4 customer numbers > assume you aren’t doing CGN. That’s true. > Let’s assume you get a ratio of 64 customers per address using CGN (the real > numbers are more like 8-16 customers > per address before stuff starts to degrade badly). > > 64 * 1024 = 65536 subscribers on a /22, assuming you have no infrastructure, > no servers, and no customers that > refuse to accept densely packed CGN. At this point, you can still hand > out a /48 to every customer for all > practical purposes if you have a /32 of IPv6. > > Yes, the ultra-tiniest of ISPs will have to pay an extra $1,500 per year for > their address space. Everybody else will > actually probably be able to pay less per year for address space once they > can abandon IPv4, even if they give a /48 > to every single end-site. > > Owen >
I use legacy IPv4 space and pay nothing. So IPv6 would be a big jump. Didn't even need to invoke NAT for my argument. But I'll repeat what I said before - want ISPs handing out lots of space? Make the minimum /20 or /24 instead of /32. I'll support that over on the other list if someone proposes it. Matthew Kaufman (Sent from my iPhone)
