nanog mailing list archives

Re: Akamai charges for IPv6 support?


From: Noam Freedman <noam+nanog () noam com>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 14:10:04 -0400

Aaron,

I’ll make sure someone follows up on your ticket.  To help accelerate overall IPv6 adoption, we stopped charging for 
new conversions to IPv6 over a year ago.  Probably just some misinformation in the sales force from the old policy...

Feel free to reach out directly to me if you end up needing more help.

Thanks,
- Noam

On Aug 18, 2014, at 12:38 PM, Aaron Hopkins <lists () die net> wrote:

Is it normal to bill for IPv6 service as a separate product?  I was
surprised to hear from from my Akamai rep they they do:

Hi Aaron, We can add the IPV6 service to the contract at an additional
cost of $XXX/month. Please let me know if you would like to go ahead with
the service and I can create the contract and send it for your review.

I've been working on adding IPv6 support to my current project on my own
time, and am now ready to enable it.  But as soon as there is a recurring
cost associated with IPv6 support, I need to be able to justify it.  And I'm
afraid that I can't currently explain a benefit of enabling IPv6 for our
users.  I'll likely end up not doing so while we're still an Akamai
customer.

It's Akamai's network, so it's their choice.  But big players adding
friction to enabling IPv6 certainly doesn't seem in everyone's best
interests in the long-term.

                                   -- Aaron


Current thread: