[ARIN-consult] [arin-announce] Fee Schedule Change Consultation
jcurran at arin.net
Tue Nov 20 08:42:57 EST 2012
On Nov 20, 2012, at 8:36 AM, Mike A. Salim <msalim at localweb.com> wrote:
> Yes, I am happy to pay for what I use. I am happy with the great job ARIN is doing, and fully understand and support the need for fees.
> My issue is this: If I am classified as a Small vs. X-Small because of my IPv4 usage that I had requested, that is fine. But I am being classified as a Small not because of what I requested or use, but because of what I was allocated as an early adopter of IPv6. Had the smaller X-Small IPv6 been available at the time, that is what I would have requested. I did not really need a /32 IPv6.
> So, IMHO, an exception should be made for those ISPs who are allocated and using a X-Small IPv4, but were allocated a Small /32 IPv6 as early adopters because there was no X-Small IPv6 at the time, resulting in them being classified as Small vs X-Small. Also, this should be done without forcing these early adopter ISPs to give up and renumber their /32 IPv6 space - we are now actively using our IPv6 space. Renumbering would be problematic for us.
Thanks for clear feedback on the proposed fee changes;
we've had a few folks now make note of this concern and
it will be explicitly considered in any path forward.
President and CEO
More information about the ARIN-consult