[ARIN-consult] discounting registration fees for IPv6 assignments

[Jimmy Hess]

On 10/29/12, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> On Oct 28, 2012, at 10:08 PM, Jesse D. Geddis <jesse at la-broadband.com>
> wrote:
> ARIN's core registry services could reasonably be considered proportional
> to the number of prefixes served; costs which are comparable between IPv4

Another thought is....  "policy development" and  number of prefixes
served are not independent.    If policy said something different,
Large ISP X,  could have requested a single /8  from ARIN,  and then,
 the costs incurred for ARIN would be lower, because they would not
have had to come back to ARIN several times to receive multiple
discontiguous /12s.

Especially for smaller  growing organizations,  ARIN has policies such
as slow start, which essentially force organizations to start with
longer prefixes,  and  request a larger number of prefixes over time
than would be ideal,  resulting in a larger number of prefixes being
allocated.

So, because ARIN policy forces them to do this as a matter of policy,
there is some unfairness in charging larger fees to smaller
organizations more for the  additional prefixes,   that they would not
have,  if they could have obtained one larger block that would meet
justified and future expected needs.

In this manner,  a tiered fee based on  overall  number resources, as
if all IPv4 resources were one allocation,  is fairer, in that sense,
than a simple count of the number of blocks.


> prefixes and IPv6 prefixes, and most definitely not proportional to the
> number of IP addresses. Note also that core registry operations costs are
> smaller than the policy & registry development costs (which benefits all
> customers.)

--
-JH