4 ms·

> Do you actually own that /48? Well. From TFA: So I decided to use Free Range Cloud service provider to lease a /48, which cost me around C$10/year. I also

> Do you actually own that /48? Well. From TFA: So I decided to use Free Range Cloud service provider to lease a /48, which cost me around C$10/year. I also used their tunnel service to then route this over to me. The link embedded in the pull quote is [0], which isn't maximally helpful, but it's useful. Approximately 60 seconds of poking around there brings us to [1], which quotes a "ARIN - /48 IPv6 lease ... Use on our network or yours" for $8/year with a $2 setup fee. That sounds a lot like what's mentioned in TFA. So. You tell me? [0] <https://freerangecloud.com/ https://freerangecloud.com/> [1] <https://freerangecloud.com/products.php https://freerangecloud.com/products.php>

jcalvinowens 7mo ago
It's was a rhetorical question, he doesn't own it. And it takes much less than sixty seconds to figure that out: $ whois 2602:fed2:7e02:: ... NetRange: 2602:FED2:: - 2602:FED2:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF CIDR: 2602:FED2::/32 NetName: 10VPN-PRIMARY NetHandle: NET6-2602-FED2-1 Parent: NET6-2600 (NET6-2600-1) NetType: Direct Allocation If that VPN provider goes out of business, he probably loses those addresses.
- simoncion 7mo ago
  You must be aware that he owns the allocation in exactly the same way you "own" an ARIN allocation? Unless you have an exemption, there are fees that you must pay annually [0]. If you do not pay them, you relinquish your assignment. [1] There's another sense in which he owns the allocation... the one you constructed in your original question: Do you actually own that /48? The problem with using the globally routable addresses internally is that your public /48 might change in the future, and and that will force you to change a bunch of internal stuff. He's paying his money to get a statically assigned /48. It's not too surprising that you can't get this information out of a whois invocation. It is -however- a bit surprising that you weren't aware that whois couldn't tell you this. [0] <https://www.arin.net/resources/fees/fee_schedule/#rsp-service-categories-and-fees https://www.arin.net/resources/fees/fee_schedule/#rsp-servic...> [1] See section 4(c) of <https://www.arin.net/about/corporate/agreements/rsa.pdf https://www.arin.net/about/corporate/agreements/rsa.pdf>

jcalvinowens 7mo ago

It's was a rhetorical question, he doesn't own it. And it takes much less than sixty seconds to figure that out: $ whois 2602:fed2:7e02:: ... NetRange: 2602:FED2:: - 2602:FED2:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF CIDR: 2602:FED2::/32 NetName: 10VPN-PRIMARY NetHandle: NET6-2602-FED2-1 Parent: NET6-2600 (NET6-2600-1) NetType: Direct Allocation If that VPN provider goes out of business, he probably loses those addresses.

simoncion 7mo ago
You must be aware that he owns the allocation in exactly the same way you "own" an ARIN allocation? Unless you have an exemption, there are fees that you must pay annually [0]. If you do not pay them, you relinquish your assignment. [1] There's another sense in which he owns the allocation... the one you constructed in your original question: Do you actually own that /48? The problem with using the globally routable addresses internally is that your public /48 might change in the future, and and that will force you to change a bunch of internal stuff. He's paying his money to get a statically assigned /48. It's not too surprising that you can't get this information out of a whois invocation. It is -however- a bit surprising that you weren't aware that whois couldn't tell you this. [0] <https://www.arin.net/resources/fees/fee_schedule/#rsp-service-categories-and-fees https://www.arin.net/resources/fees/fee_schedule/#rsp-servic...> [1] See section 4(c) of <https://www.arin.net/about/corporate/agreements/rsa.pdf https://www.arin.net/about/corporate/agreements/rsa.pdf>