[ppml] Revision to 2008-3

Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>  Thus spake "Jay Hennigan" <jay at impulse.net>
> > Such community networks are somewhat of a special case in that they
> >  aren't quite LIRs as they have no "customers" other than the
> > members of the cooperative, but they aren't end users in that they
> > exist for the purpose of distributing access to their members (who
> > are customer-like).
> >
> > IMHO, the best approach to such organizations is to modify the LIR
> > definition to include them as LIRs.   The technical model is more
> > ISP-like than end-user-like.
>
>  This, to me, is more sensible than trying to create a third category
>  of registrants.  In all of the discussion to date, I haven't found
>  any technical differentiators between "community networks" and LIRs.
>  Remember, not all LIRs are ISPs.

I oppose this proposal as written. The NPRM definition of an LIR is such
that a community network does in fact qualify as an LIR:

"A Local Internet Registry (LIR) is an IR that primarily assigns address
space to the users of the network services that it provides. LIRs are
generally ISPs, whose customers are primarily end users and possibly
other ISPs."
  http://www.arin.net/policy/nrpm.html#two4

On the subject of fees, I think ARIN should charge fair fees to all,
without favoring any particular group.  I don't think hand outs to
either the "Extra Large" LIRs  at the top end or non-profit community
networks are in the best interest of the community as a whole.

I'd like to see the fee schedule set to a flat rate per IPv4 /24 or IPv6
/48, such that ARIN's total registration fees stay the same.  This
should have the benefit of making fees more affordable for the smaller
players (commercial and non-profit alike), and encourage those that use
the most IPv4 resources to conserve.

-- 

Sincerely,
Kirk Ismay
System Administrator

--
Net Idea
201-625 Front Street Nelson, BC V1L 4B6
P:250-352-3512 | F:250-352-9780 | TF:1-888-352-3512

Check out our brand new website! www.netidea.com