[ppml] ARIN IP conservation and FREE IP Addresses

Thus spake "William Herrin" <arin-contact at dirtside.com>
> The price structure is entirely inappropriate for a rapidly
> diminishing asset like IPv4 free pool. Where conservation is
> desired, large allocations per year should made to cost more
> per address than small ones.

I'd be satisfied with a constant per-address fee structure.  If nothing 
else, that's a good first step vs. our current fee structure of giving 
additional addresses free to organizations who waste the most.

> That having been said, this discussion is moot. The xlarge entities
> have the votes to keep the favorable fee structure.

There are 80 X-Large members, out of ~2800 members.  Since it's one vote per 
member, they obviously do not "have the votes" to do anything.  However, as 
John pointed out, members don't actually vote on fees; that's done by a 
supermajority of the Board.  If members are unhappy with the current fee 
structure, they should consider that in the next round of Board elections.

S

Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking