[ppml] ARIN IP conservation and FREE IP Addresses

On Sat, 6 Oct 2007, William Herrin wrote:

> On 10/6/07, Leo Bicknell <bicknell at ufp.org> wrote:
> >
> > Leaving aside the issue of is it good or not, I'm not sure ARIN as
> > a non-profit is in a position to implement a "sin tax" on IP addresses
> > to promote conservation.
> 
> Leo,
> 
> The "Local Internet Registries" do. If you're a SOHO or hobbyist
> customer its not unusual to pay anywhere from $10 to $60 per IP
> address per year for as much as 32+1 static IP addresses.
> 
> Why should a Regional Internet Registry, one step up the food chain,
> not charge the LIR's $1 per IP address per year? Fair's fair, right?
> They charge the end users per-address so why shouldn't ARIN charge
> them the same way?
> 
> Regards,
> Bill Herrin

I would just like to point out that not all ISPs charge for IP
addresses.  If ARIN added a per IP address charge, then I suspect Verizon
Business would be temped to charge their customers for IP addresses. 

Charging for IP addresses gives the impression that the addresses are
property.  As a result, it leads to the conclusion that the only
justification required to get said addresses is if one pays enough money.  

The question I have is do we want to limit the use of IP addresses based
on address utilization or based on the amount of money an org is willing
to pay for each address?

__Jason