1 / 13

A proposal for changing IPv6 per address fee

This proposal advocates for a revision of the IPv6 per address fee calculation method, aimed at eliminating duplicate fees for previously allocated address ranges. The current fee schedule requires full payment for entire prefixes, resulting in redundant charges, especially impacting small to medium ISPs. The new scheme suggests billing only for newly allocated ranges based on actual utilization, allowing NIRs to avoid unnecessary duplicate fees. The implementation is proposed to occur three months post-endorsement by the Executive Committee, enhancing fairness and clarity in address fee distribution.

brian-collins
Télécharger la présentation

A proposal for changing IPv6 per address fee

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A proposal for changingIPv6 per address fee Izumi Okutani Japan Network Information Center NIR SIG@APNIC 18, Fiji 31 August – 3 September, 2004

  2. Introduction This presentation proposes to revise a method of calculating IPv6 per address fee in order to abolish duplicate fees charged for the same address range

  3. Background • The current fee schedule leads to charging IPv6 per address fee for the whole prefix when receiving contiguous range from the previous allocation

  4. Current IPv6 per address fee(APNIC-081) 3.4.3 IPv6 address space ---------------- For an allocation of IPv6 address space, the total per-address fee is calculated for the prefix allocated according to the number of addresses which should be utilised according to an HD-Ratio of 0.80. (snip..) In the case of an allocation which includes a previously allocated block of addresses, the total fee calculation is based on the size of the prefix allocated, regardless of　the previous allocation.

  5. Current IPv6 per address feeCase Study Case-1 : /32 initially, upgrade to /31, then to /30 Initial allocation (/32) : 7,132 x per address fee Second allocation (/32, /31 in total) : 12,417 x per address fee Third allocation (/31, /30 in total) : 21,619 x per address fee ------------------------------------------------------------------- Fee total : 78,809 x per address fee /32 New allocation Charged Case-2 : /30 initial allocation Initial allocation (/30) : 21,619 x per address fee ------------------------------------------------------------------- Fee total : 21,619 x per address fee /31 Paid(/32) New allocation (/32) Charged(/31) /30 New allocation(/31) Paid (/32)*2 Paid(/32) Charged(/30)

  6. Problem • Current fee calculation scheme is “redundant”, charging to the address space which had previously been charged • Conservative, or small/medium ISPs must pay more fee in total • JPNIC is not able to provide a reasonable explanation to our members

  7. Proposal • Define IPv6 per address fee so that it only charges for the ranges which had been additionally allocated, regardless of contiguous range

  8. Proposed description of APNIC-081 3.4.3 IPv6 address space ---------------- … In the case of an allocation which includes a previously allocated block of addresses, the total fee calculation is based on the difference of the number of /48s corresponding to HD-ratio 0.8, between the previous allocation and the new allocation. For example, the total per-address fee payable for an allocation of /30 including previous /32 allocation to a Very Large member is calculated as: (21,619 - 7,132) x $ 0.03 = $ 434.61

  9. Proposed fee scheme 7. Appendix A: HD-Ratio “IPv6 Address Allocation and Assignment Policy” • /32 to /31 • (12,417 - 7,132) x per address fee • /31 to /30 • (21,619 - 12,417) x per address fee • /32 to /29 • (37,641 - 7,132) x per address fee

  10. Proposed Fee SchemeCase Study Case-1 : /32 initially, upgrade to /31, then to /30 Initial allocation (/32) : 7,132 x per address fee Second allocation (/31 in total) : (12,417-7,132) x per address fee Third allocation (/30 in total) : (21,619-12,417) x per address fee ------------------------------------------------------------------- Fee total : 21,619 x per address fee /32 New allocation Charged Case-2 : /30 initial allocation /31 Initial allocation (/30) : 21,619 x per address fee ------------------------------------------------------------------- Fee total : 21,619 x per address fee Paid(/32) New allocation (/32) Charged(/31) Same result! /30 New allocation(/31) Paid(/31) Charged(/30)

  11. Effect • NIRs will no longer need to pay duplicate per address fee • APNIC's operational expense  ?

  12. Implementation • Proposed timeframe • 3months after EC endorsement (normal timeframe) • Documents to be changed • APNIC-081 “member-fee-schedule”

  13. Questions?

More Related