Hosting provider allocation advice

[Garry Dolley]

On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 11:24:58AM +0200, Wouter de Jong wrote:
> Hi Ted,
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ipv6-ops-bounces+wouter=widexs.nl at lists.cluenet.de [mailto:ipv6-
> > ops-bounces+wouter=widexs.nl at lists.cluenet.de] On Behalf Of Ted
> > Mittelstaedt
> > Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 21:41
> > To: Alan Batie
> > Cc: ipv6-ops at lists.cluenet.de
> > Subject: Re: Hosting provider allocation advice
> 
> 
> > Presumably, the OP is wanting to offer IPv6 so as to be able to
> > charge extra for it, save money with it, or attract more customers
> > with it (thus making money) - this is a business after all - thus
> > he should welcome the added complexity (you can charge more money
> > for it).
> 
> We won't charge extra for IPv6, the primary intention for rolling 
> out IPv6 is to be ready for IPv6-only connectivity once that 
> becomes common. And ofcourse, that also has a commercial twist.
> 'Yes, we can deliver you IPv6 so you are fully reachble over IPv4 and/or
> IPv6.'

At this point, my IPv6 is actually free.  We don't graph the
interfaces of our IPv6 router yet, and even if I did, I don't want
the headache of separate IPv4 and IPv6 graphs (so I'd need to find a
way to merge them somehow, which is probably not too hard with
rrdtool, yet I have bigger fish to fry).

Charging "extra" was never in my thinking, since I'd like to help
IPv6 adoption.  

-- 
Garry Dolley
ARP Networks, Inc. | http://www.arpnetworks.com | (818) 206-0181
Data center, VPS, and IP Transit solutions
Member Los Angeles County REACT, Unit 336 | WQGK336
Blog http://scie.nti.st