[ARIN-consult] Community Consultation: Future Direction for the ARIN Fee Schedule

[William Herrin]

On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 3:59 PM, John Curran <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:
> On Oct 11, 2014, at 2:05 PM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
>> When the IPv4 free pool was still large, this was not the case.
>> Hopefully it won't be the case for IPv6 within my lifetime -- I don't
>> want to see the end of the IPv6 free pool. Nevertheless, while IPv4
>> remains the driver and its free pool remains gone, I can imagine no
>> fairer way to spread ARIN's cost than by registrants' consumption of
>> IPv4.
>
>   The entire Internet community in the region benefits from having
>   registry services and there are likely a very large number of
>   fair and equitable approaches to distribution of costs.

Yeah? How much money is the FBI or DEA chipping in for their
consumption of registry services? What about the network security
vendors running address reputation filters? What portion of ARIN's
revenues do they supply?

I have to disagree with you John. IPv4 protocol addresses are a
linchpin resource for folks using the Internet and they're edging ever
closer to unavailable. The notion that the cost of any operation
touching on that resource could be fairly structured by some mechanism
not closely aligned with consumption of the resource itself is simply
unimaginable to me. It ought to be unimaginable to you.

You already know this, which is why ARIN fees ARE presently structured
based on consumption. But they miss -- there is a three orders of
magnitude disparity favoring the folks who have the most addresses
locked up. This is not particularly close to fair.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
May I solve your unusual networking challenges?