[arin-discuss] ipv6 fees in new fee structure

[Alex Krohn]

> I agree.  I had also commented on the earlier thread with the same
> comment.  We are in the same boat.  We did not insist on a /32, we were
> given a /32 because that was the smallest allocation at the time.  While
> I do not expect to be rewarded financially for being an early adopter, I
> do not expect to be penalized either.

From:

    http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/2012-March/002160.html

it seems like 234 members who have x-small v4 and small v6 are faced
with being charged under small when they (probably) would have been just
as happy if their initial allocation was a /36 and thus stayed in
x-small.

The options to these members now are to either see the fees double or
return their /32 and get a new /36 (can't take the /36 out of your
existing /32 either).

This doesn't seem to be in the spirit of the original post of the
"strong desire to minimize fees for the smallest members". 

Since /32 was the smallest allocation you could get for many members, it
seems like a /32 should be considered x-small. 

Thoughts?

Alex