[ARIN-consult] Fee restructuring

[Owen DeLong]

On Oct 26, 2012, at 2:48 PM, Jo Rhett <jrhett at netconsonance.com> wrote:

> On Oct 26, 2012, at 7:18 AM, Andrew Dul - andrew.dul wrote:
>> On 2012-10-25 14:35, Owen DeLong wrote:
>>> This fee restructuring places a number of incentives in the exactly
>>> wrong direction.
>>> 
>>> 1. In many cases (especially end users), their fees are doubled if
>>> they adopt IPv6. At the very least, end users should not be made to
>>> pay additional annual fees as a penalty for adopting IPv6. If
>>> anything, I would suggest that ARIN consider a structure like this:
>> 
>> In general, I support the new fee schedule.  There is one area which I believe needs consideration.  For the smallest end-user (1 IPv4, 1 ASN, 1 IPv6) their registration fees are  going to triple from $100 to $300.  I don't believe this is the message that ARIN wants to send to the world at large and these smallest organizations.  I don't know the number of orgs that are subject to this fee increase but my guess is that this is a significant number of end-user orgs.
>> 
>> My suggestion for end-users would be the first 3 records per org-id are $100, then $100 for additional records.
> 
> 
> First, I don't believe that $300 is any significant amount of money to any operating business, profit or non-profit. I do believe that individuals who are using /24 blocks for personal use who could quite easily use provider-assigned space are going to pay more than they would like. I would like to note that I am one of those individuals myself, and yet I support this proposal against my own interests.

You are, in fact, incorrect about the first half of that statement.

> However, it would be stupid to ignore the fact that a large number of organizations are going to see their annual fee triple, and that could earn ARIN some angst that they don't need.
> 
> I believe that we have an opportunity to use the fee schedule to forward ARIN policy and help IPv6 adoption here. If we were to move forward with the new fee structure, but give organizations that have or adopt IPv6 a break, then it would promote forward policy.

Agreed.

> 
> For example: if I have an IP assignment and an ASN, I would pay $200. If I acquire an IPv6 assignment from ARIN, I would (temporarily) be returned to $100/year. This would help organizations which aren't moving forward to at least acquire the IPv6 assignment. Yes, they might sit on it. But perhaps they might actually start moving forward with it.
> 
> Over time let this temporary thing expire, and then it may actually become a useful thing to help organizations move away from IPv4. Pay $300 a year, or return your IPv4 block and get a permanent reduction in fees.

I think the current trend is towards $100 covers your first of each resource class permanently and $100 for each additional resource record. I'm fine with that trend.

Owen