[ARIN-consult] [arin-announce] Fee Schedule Change Consultation
Jeremy Anthony Kinsey
jer at mia.net
Wed Nov 14 12:29:12 EST 2012
Brian, it is disproportionate.
My bill is doubling. I've sent several emails to Arin and have yet to receive a response other than, "is your org id this?".
The lack of response is a bit disconcerting to say the least.
On Nov 14, 2012, at 11:08 AM, Jesse D. Geddis <jesse at la-broadband.com> wrote:
> The hyperbolic verbiage aside the point has been mentioned by many.
> Whether it's all of us subsidizing, flat out, organizations responsible
> for arguably some of the biggest waste of resources or smaller
> organizations subsidizing larger organizations it's all the same.
> When you take a small who pays 2,250 to consume 8,000 IP's and compare
> that to a large who pays $18k to consume a minimum of 262k ip's up to an
> unlimited amount it seems massively disproportionate.
> The large pays _at_most_ $0.14 per IP while the small pays $3.64 per IP.
> The fees don't encourage efficient use of address space via a financial
> stick. For example if I have a /14 and am requesting another /16 what the
> heck do I care how efficiently it's used? Anything else I get assigned is
> completely free.
> The fees put the burden on the backs of smaller organizations to carry the
> water for organizations responsible for the most waste.
Sounds a lot like the way our tax system works there Brian!
I cannot say I am pleased with the proposed fee schedule. If not for the comic books and special election logos, conference and other elaborate and excessive and wasteful spending I'd say I would normally not disagree with logic. Do I really need 3 snail mail letters to remind me to vote?
However, I keep a copy of that comic on my desk to remind myself why there's a fee increase.
I apologize for the cynicism and mean no disrespect. But I think Brian makes a valid point here that his being overlooked.
I've read through the PDF that describes the revenue in over the years, but have yet to see anything that shows the revenue out. I realize we're all thinking about the future down the road as it concerns the fee schedule and realize that at some point the revenue stream will level off. As it stands now, its still growing. I'd be more concerned with cutting waste as a form of generating more revenue than boosting the fee schedule on one particular group.
As I understand it there are less than 500 or so of us that are seeing the increase. I just wonder how many others are middle of the road/border line like us? We're just over the threshold and will have a doubling of our fees as a result. I suppose if I did not have to make an annual payment it might be easier to mitigate the expense out of cash flow. The lump sum and a doubling in these tough economic times is not going to be easy.
More information about the ARIN-consult