Fortunately you are wrong:<div><br></div><div><a href="http://www.apnic.net/services/apply-for-resources/check-your-eligibility">http://www.apnic.net/services/apply-for-resources/check-your-eligibility</a></div><div><br></div>
<div><strong style="margin:0px;padding:0px;color:rgb(81,81,81);font-family:tahoma,verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:11px;line-height:19.796875px;background-color:rgb(243,247,248)">Criteria for small multihoming delegations</strong><br style="margin:0px;padding:0px;color:rgb(81,81,81);font-family:tahoma,verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:11px;line-height:19.796875px;background-color:rgb(243,247,248)">
<ul style="margin:0px 0px 1.4em 3em;padding:0px;line-height:1.5em;color:rgb(81,81,81);font-family:tahoma,verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:11px;background-color:rgb(243,247,248)"><li style="margin:0px;padding:0px;line-height:1.8em">
An organization is eligible if it is currently multihomed with provider-based addresses, or demonstrates a plan to multihome within one month.</li><li style="margin:0px;padding:0px;line-height:1.8em">Organizations requesting a delegation under these terms must demonstrate that they are able to use 25% of the requested addresses immediately and 50% within one year.</li>
</ul><strong style="margin:0px;padding:0px;color:rgb(81,81,81);font-family:tahoma,verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:11px;line-height:19.796875px;background-color:rgb(243,247,248)"></strong><div><div>Multi-homing is all you need.</div>
<div><br>...Skeeve</div><div><br></div><div><div><b style="font-size:13px;font-family:Calibri">Skeeve Stevens - </b><span style="font-size:13px;font-family:Calibri">eintellego Networks Pty Ltd</span></div><div><div><span style="font-family:Calibri;font-size:13px"><a href="mailto:skeeve@eintellegonetworks.com" target="_blank">skeeve@eintellegonetworks.com</a> ; <a href="http://www.eintellegonetworks.com/" target="_blank">www.eintellegonetworks.com</a></span><font><p style="font-family:Calibri;font-size:13px;margin:0px">
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; <a>skype://skeeve</a></p><p style="font-family:Calibri;font-size:13px;margin:0px"><a href="http://facebook.com/eintellegonetworks" target="_blank">facebook.com/eintellegonetworks</a> ; <a href="http://twitter.com/networkceoau" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve" target="_blank">linkedin.com/in/skeeve</a> </p>
<p style="font-family:Calibri;font-size:13px;margin:0px"><a href="http://twitter.com/networkceoau" target="_blank">twitter.com/networkceoau</a> ; blog: <a href="http://www.network-ceo.net/" target="_blank">www.network-ceo.net</a></p>
<p style="font-family:Calibri;font-size:13px;margin:0px"><img src="http://eintellegonetworks.com/logos/ein09.png"><br></p><p style="margin:0px"><span style="color:rgb(127,0,127);font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:13px">The Experts Who The Experts Call</span></p>
</font></div><div style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14px;color:rgb(127,0,127)"><span style="color:rgb(0,32,96);font-size:13px">Juniper - Cisco </span><span style="color:rgb(0,32,96);font-size:13px">- Cloud</span></div>
</div></div></div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 7:07 PM, Tony <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:td_miles@yahoo.com" target="_blank">td_miles@yahoo.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div><div style="font-size:12pt;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif">Forgive me if the thinking on this has changed, but my unerstanding was that for multihoming as an "end-user" is not an acceptable reason to get an IPv6 allocation. You are supposed to get some address space from both/all of your upstreams and some magic to make your servers dual-IPv6-homed on the addresses given to you from upstreams. There probably some RFC's on this and making it happen that someone else might be able to fill in the blanks ?<br>
<br>I have no idea if this is still in place, but APNIC policy seems to indicate that if you have an IPv4 allocation already (as ISP or end-user) then you'll get some IPv6 automatically. If you do NOT have an IPv6 allocation already then you need to meet the criteria just for IPv6, which are:<br>
<br>* Must be an LIR<br>* Not be an end site<br>* Plan to announce IPv6 within two
years<strong><span style="color:rgb(211,131,6)"></span></strong><br><br>The idea being that allocation will be a lot more heirarchical (IR->RIR->LIR) to prevent a whole heap of /48's being advertised into the global routing table, so that it is mostly /32's and above to prevent bloat of routing tables (like has happened with IPv4 people advertising /24's instead of the aggregate larger prefix).<br>
<div><span><br></span></div><div>So the reason you can't get a small IPv6 allocation just for multihoming is that you're not supposed to be able to (unlike IPv4 where this is a valid reason for getting address space).</div>
<div><br></div><div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif"><br></div><div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif">
I'm not sure if it was on this milaing or another, but I recently saw a link to this doc on IPv6 subnetting:<br></div><div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif">
<br></div><div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif"><a href="http://www.ipbcop.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/BCOP-IPv6_Subnetting.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.ipbcop.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/BCOP-IPv6_Subnetting.pdf</a></div>
<div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif"><br></div><div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif">
<br></div><div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif">regards,</div><div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif">
Tony.<br></div><div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif"><br></div><div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif">
<br></div><div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif">(apologies if I've grasped the wrong end of the stick)</div><div style="font-style:normal;font-size:16px;background-color:transparent;font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif">
<br><blockquote style="border-left:2px solid rgb(16,16,255);margin-left:5px;margin-top:5px;padding-left:5px"> <div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt"> <div style="font-family:times new roman,new york,times,serif;font-size:12pt">
<div dir="ltr"> <font face="Arial"> <hr size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold">From:</span></b> Paul Gear <<a href="mailto:ausnog@libertysys.com.au" target="_blank">ausnog@libertysys.com.au</a>><br> <b><span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span></b> <a href="mailto:ausnog@lists.ausnog.net" target="_blank">ausnog@lists.ausnog.net</a> <br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span></b> Sunday, 3 March 2013 5:14 PM<br> <b><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span></b> Re: [AusNOG] IPv4<br> </font> </div> <br><div>
<div>
<div>I just sent a message privately to
James about this very topic, but now that it has been brought up,
perhaps it's worth sharing with the list:<br>
<br>
<hr size="2" width="100%"><br>
Something that don't understand is: why isn't there a larger price
difference (from APNIC's perspective) between IPv4 and IPv6, and
why isn't there a larger price difference between developing and
developed economies?<br>
<br>
I would have thought that if IPv6 adoption is an economic problem,
part of the answer would be to dramatically lower cost barriers to
entry for IPv6. I run a single-person small business, and i would
love to be IPv6 enabled, but because i'm multi-homed through two
consumer-grade ISPs, i can't do IPv6 without getting my own
allocation. The minimum price to spend with APNIC is $1,180 per
year to get this (disregarding membership fees for the time
being), and that gets me anything up to a /34. Cost from there
climbs rather rapidly, with /33 = $1,534 and /32 = $1,994. But
even the minimum is more than i pay for my entire year's Internet
access from my primary ISP.<br>
<br>
If the minimum of $1,180 were eliminated and one followed the IPv6
pricing down the chain to /48, the costs would represent pretty
minimal barriers to entry for smaller organisations:<br>
<br>
<table>
<colgroup width="85"></colgroup> <colgroup width="101"></colgroup>
<colgroup width="85"></colgroup> <tbody>
<tr>
<td height="16"><b>Prefix</b></td>
<td><b>/56 blocks</b></td>
<td><b>Cost</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">32</td>
<td>16777216</td>
<td>$1,994.20</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">33</td>
<td>8388608</td>
<td>$1,534.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">34</td>
<td>4194304</td>
<td>$1,180.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">35</td>
<td>2097152</td>
<td>$907.69</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">36</td>
<td>1048576</td>
<td>$698.22</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">37</td>
<td>524288</td>
<td>$537.10</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">38</td>
<td>262144</td>
<td>$413.15</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">39</td>
<td>131072</td>
<td>$317.81</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">40</td>
<td>65536</td>
<td>$244.47</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">41</td>
<td>32768</td>
<td>$188.05</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">42</td>
<td>16384</td>
<td>$144.66</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">43</td>
<td>8192</td>
<td>$111.27</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">44</td>
<td>4096</td>
<td>$85.60</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">45</td>
<td>2048</td>
<td>$65.84</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">46</td>
<td>1024</td>
<td>$50.65</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">47</td>
<td>512</td>
<td>$38.96</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="16">48</td>
<td>256</td>
<td>$29.97</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
The other thing i think would help in relation to this would be
eliminating (or dramatically reducing) the associate membership
fee for IPv6-only allocations. This would put usable IPv6
allocations within the reach of any organisation in any of the
economies that APNIC serves.<br>
<br>
I don't know where the appropriate place to raise this issue is,
but i would really like to see it considered.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
On 03/03/2013 04:47 PM, Don Gould wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">You
missed my point. Sorry clearly I wrote it badly.
<br>
<br>
I'm not an APNIC member. I just want to have a play to grow my
learning.
<br>
<br>
In the past we all just used to help each other out and stuff just
'got done'.
<br>
<br>
To me, this whole debate is just a joke. I remember when 'we'
used to be the tight internet community raging against the 'telco
PSTN' community, forging into new ideas, just making stuff happen.
<br>
<br>
As we've grown up it feels like we've lost our youthful spirit of
community and just making stuff happen. We seem to have become
the monster we all used to hate on.
<br>
<br>
Sure, I can email helpdesk@apnic.... but I'm quite sure I'll get
refered to some member ship forms and have to go find myself
$3,000 before I can play.
<br>
<br>
Spence's point was that you could just email some dude called
Geoff... he was everyone's mate, that guy who shows up at the
meetings, seems to know his stuff, writes an interesting blog and
hung around one of the uni's that some of us went to.
<br>
<br>
Now it's some faceless, nameless email address with no
personality, no love, no sense of 'if ya willing to step up to ask
and give it a go then we'll give you some resource to support
you'.
<br>
<br>
...wonder if I better explained my thoughts?
<br>
<br>
D
<br>
<br>
On 3/03/2013 7:34 p.m., Jeremy Visser wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">On 03/03/13 17:18, Don Gould wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">With respect to APNIC, has James
highlighted and problem in the world
<br>
we're now living?
<br>
<br>
Who do I 'just email' to get a v6 block that I can announce?
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<a rel="nofollow" href="mailto:helpdesk@apnic.net" target="_blank">helpdesk@apnic.net</a>
<br>
<br>
There is probably a more specific way to request a v6 block, but
the
<br>
helpdesk will point you in the right direction. It's what they
get paid
<br>
to do. :-)
<br>
<br>
At my work, we have a /21 of IPv4 allocated to us. Because a /21
of IPv4
<br>
costs more than a /32 of IPv6, we don't pay anything extra for
our IPv6
<br>
space.
<br>
<br>
Thus made it very easy to justify playing with IPv6 to the boss.
:-)
<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div><br>_______________________________________________<br>AusNOG mailing list<br><a href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net" target="_blank">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br><a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br>
<br><br> </div> </div> </blockquote></div> </div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
AusNOG mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net">AusNOG@lists.ausnog.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog" target="_blank">http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>