Hosting provider allocation advice

[Ted Mittelstaedt]

Wouter de Jong wrote:
> Hi Ted,
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ted Mittelstaedt [mailto:tedm at ipinc.net]
>> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 15:58
>> To: Wouter de Jong
>> Cc: ipv6-ops at lists.cluenet.de
>> Subject: Re: Hosting provider allocation advice
> 
> 
>>> We've also fiddled with the idea of assigning one /48 to each of
>> these
>>> vlans,
>>> and let each 'server' use a /64 out of it. This still seems a bit
>> weird
>>> though...
>>>
>> No it's not when you understand IPv6
>>
>> You use DNS names, right?  You can always renumber.
> 
> I'm not really sure I understand what you mean, 
> could you clarify a bit perhaps ?
> 

What I was meaning is don't be too hung up about making the
wrong decision about allocating subnets right now.  If you force
reliance on DNS from the absolute beginning then if you need to
renumber later to reallocate your subnets, it's no big deal.

Buried in the fine print of our own shared web hosting contracts
is language that states the customer's server is never guaranteed
to keep a specific IP address.

Granted, few customers READ the fine print, but we make every
effort when setting them up to not mention IP addresses

>>> Also, since we do IP based billing here,
>>> we'd never know if one has 'hijacked' some IP space.
>>>
>> "IP based billing" will be the first casualty of IPv6.
>>
>> There's a shortage of IPv4 which is why you can bill for
>> each IPv4 number.
>>
>> There's no shortage of IPv6.  Your competitors won't hesitate
>> to spread around IPv6 numbers like peanut butter.
> 
> I meant traffic billing based on IP number :)
> 

Doctor it hurts when I do this!

Then don't do that!

Seriously, you need to rethink your billing data collection.  How 
difficult is it to go to your router that's feeding your network and 
setup a permit access list and count packets that pass through it?
Construct the list with whatever granularity you want.

Ted

>> Ted
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Wouter
>