<html><head></head><body><div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;">Hi,</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;">If we are to base membership fees on resources then the only way that makes sense today is to make it really expensive if you're not giving your subscribers ipv6 addresses.</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;">Could even have it with multiple tiers</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;">majority of subs singlestacked ipv4: really expensive</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;">majority dualstacked: fairly cheap</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;">majority of subs singlestacked ipv6: really cheap</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;">This makes it very easy for all the new "small" LIRs to reach the fairly cheap fee, as they don't have a lot of subscribers to dualstack. And it gives incentive for every LIR to at least dualstack, maybe move away from ipv4 all together. Also to ensure that their subscriber base have modern equipment capable of handling ipv6.</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;"><br></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;">The final /22 ipv4 is enough to serve huge numbers of eyeball subscribers, if used wisely for supporting services and nat64 pools (or similar technology).</div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: monospace; width: 71ch; word-wrap: break-word; word-break: break-word;">And as more and more services get ipv6 the number of subscribers served through those pools can be increased even further.</div></div><div class="-x-evo-paragraph -x-evo-top-signature-spacer"><br></div><div>/Robin</div><div><br></div><div>On Thu, 2016-09-22 at 18:51 +0200, Tim Armstrong wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><p dir="ltr">Rather than bickering over the last scraps of IPv4, saving smaller LIRs a few hundred euros, attempting to somehow screw the older LIRs, or three at the same time. Wouldn't our time be better spent working out ways to improve end user adoption of IPv6? </p> <p dir="ltr">I'd like to propose RIPE set up a fund (summer of code style) for the implementation of native IPv6 support in open-source software (such as cloudsta k, etc) and simplifying end-user adoption. Perhaps we should even offer a free public IPv6 tunnel service for natural persons similar to the service currently offered by hurricane electric.</p> <p dir="ltr">-Tim</p> <div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 22 Sep 2016 6:13 p.m., "Floris Bos" <<a href="mailto:bos@je-eigen-domein.nl">bos@je-eigen-domein.nl</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote type="cite">On 09/22/2016 01:57 PM, Daniel Pearson wrote:<br> <blockquote type="cite"> I'm not saying that a discussion is bad, but I'm simply saying that most of the discussions are being had are not based on fact.<br> <br> To my knowledge RIPE doesn't have a list of members categorized by assignment size, so this is something that someone would need to parse the RIPE db for, it's all public record so it can be done.<br> <br></blockquote> <br> Counting all allocated IPv4 each LIR has, and converting it back to CIDR:<br> <br> CIDR Number of LIRs<br> <br> <= /24 1<br> <= /23 4<br> <= /22 6051<br> <= /21 1582<br> <= /20 1638<br> <= /19 1547<br> <= /18 1040<br> <= /17 709<br> <= /16 386<br> <= /15 293<br> <= /14 134<br> <= /13 110<br> <= /12 80<br> <= /11 64<br> <= /10 25<br> <= /9 14<br> <= /8 6<br> <= /7 2<br> <br> IPv6 only 241<br> <br> <br> If we were to take ARIN's fees as example where up to and including /20 is less expensive than RIPE's current fees, 9276 out of the 13686 LIRs with IPv4 would pay less.<br> Not just new ones...<br> <br> Total income would be similar.<br> <br> <br> Yours sincerely,<br> <br> Floris Bos<br> <br> <br> ----<br> If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss<br> mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page:<br> <a href="https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lirportal.ripe.net/gen<wbr>eral/</a><br> <br> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.<br> <br></blockquote></div></div> <pre>---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: <a href="https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/">https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/</a> Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.</pre></blockquote></body></html>