<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Robin,<br>
<br>
There is one big question. How are you going to prove, that my
network, which you won't have an inside view on, is indeed dual
stacked. I can request an IPv6 block, I can tell you I'm using it
but if you go and try to prove that you would end up over stepping
the bounds as RIPE.<br>
<br>
<br>
Daniel~<br>
<br>
On 09/23/2016 08:22 AM, Robin Johansson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:1474636964.26061.56.camel@reth.se" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div>Hi,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>No, not really.</div>
<div>The legal/financial perspective has been that RIPE is a
non-for-profit organisation.</div>
<div>This proposal doesn't imply that the aggregated membership
fees should exceed the running costs for the oranisation. Only
how they are distributed among the members.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Much of the discussion has been that it's unfair that new
LIRs with only a /22 ipv4 have to pay as much as all others. </div>
<div>A new LIR is in a good position to dualstack every single
device from the start, meaning that if they can end up with a
lower fee than the older LIRs, who have millions of devices to
dualstack before they qualify for the lower fee.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The real difficulty would be how to measure the actual
distribution.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It likely that this model doesn't cause a much larger cost
for the large players than today, but it also means that a new
provider that choose to offer ipv6-only or dualstacked services
get away at a much lower cost.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>It makes more sense to promote the adoption of todays
technology, rather than clinging on to things of the past (IPv4)
that can't be changed enough to make a difference anyhow.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Example of weights</div>
<div>singelstacked ipv6, factor 1</div>
<div>dualstacked, factor 10</div>
<div>singlestacked ipv4, factor 1000</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Over time the amount of singlestacked ipv4 LIRs will go away,
which means that we slowly move back towards the same equal fee
structure we have today.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>/Robin</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class="-x-evo-paragraph -x-evo-top-signature-spacer"><br>
</div>
<div>On Fri, 2016-09-23 at 07:27 -0500, Daniel Pearson wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Robin,<br>
<br>
Not to be rude, but we've already explained why this is not
possible for RIPE to do several times in this thread both from
a financial and legal perspective. <br>
<br>
Daniel~<br>
<br>
On 09/23/2016 05:30 AM, Robin Johansson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:1474626613.26061.32.camel@reth.se"
type="cite">
<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><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 moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true"
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 moz-do-not-send="true" 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>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">----
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 moz-do-not-send="true" 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>
<p><br>
</p>
<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 moz-do-not-send="true" 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>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">----
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 class="moz-txt-link-freetext" 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>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>