[AusNOG] another ipv6 Q

[Matt Richards]

On 3/07/2014 2:09 p.m., Robert Hudson wrote:
> On 3 July 2014 11:48, Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org 
> <mailto:marka at isc.org>> wrote:
>
>
>     In message
>     <CAEUfUGPOheJKFW8yNUJ_Y=wtOV978RaeXraMfLP82xQJXrB+0A at mail.gmail.com <mailto:wtOV978RaeXraMfLP82xQJXrB%2B0A at mail.gmail.com>>,
>     Skee
>     ve Stevens writes:
>     > --e89a8f8393fdab65e704fd3faae4
>     > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>     >
>     > Mark,
>     >
>     > To be accurate, ipv6 from APNIC is not $0.
>
>     I said he could get IPv6 addresses for $0 based on the prerequiste
>     that he had IPv4 addresses from them.  I did not say how many
>     addresses he could get for $0 or that he could get unlimited IPv6
>     addresses because I couldn't be bothered running the calculator.
>
>     > If your IPv6 allocation exceeds the value of the IPv4
>     allocation, you will
>     > pay the greater of the two.
>
>     Which is why the next sentence was "You pay MAX(IPv4 cost, IPv6
>     cost)."
>
>
> If you have a /24 IPv4 allocation from APNIC, it is my understanding 
> that you can get a /32 IPv6 allocation at no additional cost (and I 
> believe it has infact already been allocated to you by default, you 
> just need to claim it and start using it).
>

We have a /24 from APNIC, and got a /48. We then got another /24 and 
APNIC wanted me to justify a second /48 (which I haven't bothered doing 
yet).

Matt.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ausnog.net/pipermail/ausnog/attachments/20140703/6e942b3c/attachment.html>